Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump’s unhinged behaviour won’t invoke the 25th

135

Comments

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. 1983, they're acting foolishly, either because they targeted the Americans on purpose or because they're targeting the Americans by mistake.
  • Options

    malcolmg said:

    Brexit Britain, your low birth rate, shrinking population, socially conformist, high national debt future lies before you. Grasp it with both hands!

    https://twitter.com/PaulEmbery/status/1182716114641530880?s=20

    You heard it here first, TBP's flagship policy will be to resuscitate the British whaling industry.

    I’m not sure that they quite share the WWII nostalgia of the Brexiteers?
    It may genuinely be a thing in certain circles, but I rarely, if ever, hear "WWII nostalgia" in real life. It's the same with the British Empire fixation that all Leavers are supposed to have. It just doesn't manifest itself among the people I know. I don't even see it in random folk out in public.
    I accept that the likes of Farage and Rees Mogg are into it, but does anyone genuinely experience it out in the real world?
    Certainly not heard it up here much , lots in media though and it does seem to appeal to a certain stereotype. Many still miss the empire.
    ... and most of those were born long after it had effectively ended.
    Do you know many people nostalgic for Empire? I don't know a single one.
    Tbf no, I don't.

    My point was that anyone who is nostalgic for Empire is hankering after something they probably don't have any actual experience of.
    Glad we can put the myth to bed, then. We've been continually told on here that Leavers love the Empire so much we all dress up as Michael Caine and do Rorke's Drift reenactments down The Generous Briton on a Sunday afternoon! Now you say you've never actually experienced it, we can file it away along with other Brexit myths like bendy bananas.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    More on 'accidentally' firing at the Americans:
    https://twitter.com/Josiensor/status/1182751126195712000

    Kobane, it'll be remembered, is where the Kurds heroically withstood an ISIS siege against all the odds.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    I believe the US and Turkey are the two NATO members with the largest armies, as an aside.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,039

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,568
    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited October 2019

    Hey Momentum kids. Here is your leading Lexiteer:

    twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1182914392326901761

    He is like that person we all know who invited to events always seems to reply with terribly sorry double booked again...
  • Options

    One thing about Trump we know for sure is that anyone who believes he would ever be a friend to the UK is a complete and irredeemable fool.

    You certainly wouldn't get those gullible types on PB.

  • Options
    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    Let's hope that US forces aren't faced with the dilemma that confronted the Dutch UN detachment at Srebrenica.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,090

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    Let's hope that US forces aren't faced with the dilemma that confronted the Dutch UN detachment at Srebrenica.
    Will they have to leg it with their tails between their legs. Erdogan was obviously not impressed by Trump's ravings about scrapping their economy.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. G, be interesting (and quite possibly alarming) to see how Trump responds.

    If he does retreat, that'll make the right far, far from impressed. Maybe that impeachment could happen after all.
  • Options
    https://twitter.com/lbcbreaking/status/1182964030362832902?s=20


    No chance - she's a 'female' (tm Martin on Friday night dinner)
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,039

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    Let's hope that US forces aren't faced with the dilemma that confronted the Dutch UN detachment at Srebrenica.
    If they do then I'll guarantee they won't have to request tacair 10 times before they finally get it like Col. Karremans...
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,904
    edited October 2019
    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,147

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    Events like these might cause you to rethink your views on NATO and EU defence.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    The likelihood of a snap UK GE might be receding, but there is still increasing activity in terms of betting markets. Outwith the main MAJ and party overall seat number markets, there is a plethora of markets requiring specialist knowledge. For example:

    (only odds shorter than 10/1 shown)

    Aberdeen S
    SNP 2/5
    Con 7/4

    Beaconsfield
    Con 4/7
    Dominic Grieve (Ind) 5/4

    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    LD 1/2
    Lab 6/4

    Bishop Aukland
    Con 10/11
    Lab EVS
    Bxp 8/1

    Boston and Skegness
    Con 1/8
    Bxp 4/1

    Cambridgeshire S
    Con 8/11
    LD EVS

    Chelsea and Fulham
    Con 2/5
    LD 7/2
    Lab 4/1

    Chingford and Woodford Green
    Con 2/5
    Lab 7/4

    Cities of London and Westminster
    Con EVS
    LD EVS
    Lab 6/1

    Doncaster N
    Lab 1/5
    Con 4/1
    Bxp 8/1

    East Dunbartonshire
    LD 1/3
    SNP 2/1

    Esher and Walton
    Con 1/5
    LD 3/1

    Finchley and Golders Green
    Con EVS
    LD EVS
    Lab 6/1

    Hartlepool
    Lab 4/6
    Con 11/10

    Islington N
    Lab 1/25
    LD 8/1

    Kensington
    Con 4/5
    Lab 2/1
    LD 3/1

    Manchester Withington
    Lab 1/8
    LD 4/1

    My predictions:

    Aberdeen S: SNP
    Beaconsfield: Con (easily)
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark: Lab
    Bishop Aukland: Con
    Boston and Skegness: Con
    Cambridgeshire S: LD
    Chelsea and Fulham: Con
    Chingford and Woodford Green: Con
    Cities of London and Westminster: TCTC
    Doncaster N: Lab
    East Dunbartonshire: LD
    Esher and Walton: Con
    Finchley and Golders Green: Con (won't be close)
    Hartlepool: Lab
    Islington N: Lab
    Kensington: TCTC
    Manchester Withington: Lab
    Fantastic. Thanks. Great when someone sticks their neck out.

    In only one seat do you go for a longer than EVS winner: Bermondsey and Old Southwark. Why?

    Lib Dem operation there particularly poor?

    Great Labour on the ground team?

    Shadsy is a genius?
    It's not really a LibDem seat; it's a seat where there was an incumbent (who just happened to be a LibDem) an who worked incredibly hard for a long, long time, and who will not be standing in 2019/2020.

    I think Labour will walk it.

    Shadsy's no fool. And some of these constituencies are jokes.
    I agree re- Bermondsey and Portsmouth South. Not convinced re- Bishop Auckland. I also think Wimbledon will be a Con v Lab contest in a GE.
  • Options
    SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    IF the DUP and ERG are on-board with any deal that is presented to parliament then I am finding it quite difficult to see the electoral benefit in Labour attempting to vote it down.

    MPs must be almost as fatigued as the country generally and refusing to support a reasonable deal that has been given the green light by the EU, DUP and ERG is going to be extremely difficult to defend.

    For the majority of Labour MPs the thought of getting Brexit done, moving immediately in to a GE where they will lose BUT seeing the back of Corbyn has got to be extremely tempting.

    No Brexit hassle and no Corbyn.


  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,039

    Mr. G, be interesting (and quite possibly alarming) to see how Trump responds.

    If he does retreat, that'll make the right far, far from impressed. Maybe that impeachment could happen after all.

    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Glenn, making strategic decisions based on short term politicians rather than long term political structures is foolish.

    Trump being a moron doesn't mean we should abandon NATO. By that definition we'd play hokey-cokey with it depending on whether the US president was to our liking or not, and they'd do the same depending on what they thought of the PM.

    NATO and the EU are also fundamentally different kettles of fish, so you're not comparing like with like.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    His greatest act would be to continue as leader and destroy the left at the next GE. The Tories are unpalatable too, but not quite as unpalatable with voters as a Corbyn led Labour Party.
  • Options
    SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    Dura_Ace said:


    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.

    Hmmm...I think you may find Labour are the bloodthirsty party.

    Kosovo
    Afghanistan
    Iraq

    I would find the above far harder to defend than:

    The Falklands
    Gulf War I
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Ace, can't imagine Republicans are delighted at US positions being targeted and fired upon, though.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,147

    Mr. Glenn, making strategic decisions based on short term politicians rather than long term political structures is foolish.

    Trump being a moron doesn't mean we should abandon NATO. By that definition we'd play hokey-cokey with it depending on whether the US president was to our liking or not, and they'd do the same depending on what they thought of the PM.

    NATO and the EU are also fundamentally different kettles of fish, so you're not comparing like with like.

    I'm not the one comparing them. It's you who argued that EU defence integration is a bad thing because you believe it undermines NATO.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Glenn, EU defence integration has overlap with NATO, the EU itself has far more influence and desire for ongoing integration in a vast array of areas which NATO does not.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    SunnyJim said:

    Dura_Ace said:


    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.

    Hmmm...I think you may find Labour are the bloodthirsty party.

    Kosovo
    Afghanistan
    Iraq

    I would find the above far harder to defend than:

    The Falklands
    Gulf War I
    What were the Conservatives' positions on Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq?
    What were Labour's positions on the Falklands and the Gulf war?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,147

    Mr. Glenn, EU defence integration has overlap with NATO, the EU itself has far more influence and desire for ongoing integration in a vast array of areas which NATO does not.

    Suppose the EU became a single state. How would that be incompatible with NATO?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,090

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Glenn, if the EU became a single state that would rather back up my view that it wants to integrate too much.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,835
    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. G, be interesting (and quite possibly alarming) to see how Trump responds.

    If he does retreat, that'll make the right far, far from impressed. Maybe that impeachment could happen after all.

    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.
    Indeed, the US Right is following the Isolationist model of pre war US politics.

    Withdrawing troops from Middle East, Japan, Korea and Europe, and undermining international organisations like UN and WTO is the sort of political milieu of Trumps dad.
  • Options
    SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    Noo said:


    What were the Conservatives' positions on Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq?
    What were Labour's positions on the Falklands and the Gulf war?

    I was in the military during Labour's militaristic period and, despite being a Conservative voter, I supported their decision.

    Why?

    Because not for a moment did I believe a Labour Prime Minister would take the country to war on the basis of, and I will be generous, questionable information.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
    What election?
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    SunnyJim said:

    Noo said:


    What were the Conservatives' positions on Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq?
    What were Labour's positions on the Falklands and the Gulf war?

    I was in the military during Labour's militaristic period and, despite being a Conservative voter, I supported their decision.

    Why?

    Because not for a moment did I believe a Labour Prime Minister would take the country to war on the basis of, and I will be generous, questionable information.
    Lovely, but that is irrelevant to my question.
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Noo said:

    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
    What election?
    The one they will arrange if Corbyn resigns in the way that has been discussed on here ad nauseam
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    If Farage can stay within a certain percentage of the Lib Dems we could yet avoid disaster.

    Nigel Farage the hero of liberal democracy, who'd have thought it...
    We can't avoid disaster because if Johnson loses Corbyn, who is Johnson on speed, gets in.

    Avoiding disaster requires either a genuine political earthquake or Corbyn to Leave post before the election.
    Given neither the Liberal Democrats or Farage are likely to put Corbyn in Number 10 that is not really true.

    Corbyn needs either a Labour majority or a Labour plus SNP plus Plaid plus Green majority to become PM
    If Johnson loses Corbyn becomes PM.

    Although I am amazed anyone can think of Johnson's record as anything but a disaster, so in a sense we haven't avoided it.
    Not necessarily.

    If Johnson loses the Tory majority even with the DUP he could still stay PM if he leads the largest party and the Tories and DUP (and any Brexit Party MPs) have more seats combined than Labour, the SNP, Plaid and the Greens combined as if the LDs hold the balance of power they will refuse to make Corbyn PM either.

    It is thus possible LD MPs could keep Boris as PM by default
    Very unlikely that LDs will refuse to support a VNOC in Johnson.Were there to be any hint of that, LD voters would switch back to Labour in droves.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,147

    Mr. Glenn, if the EU became a single state that would rather back up my view that it wants to integrate too much.

    So actually your argument has nothing to do with NATO. It's just motivated reasoning based on your dislike of the EU.
  • Options

    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
    A shambolic Labour leadership election would just about sum up their dismal handling of the whole Brexit issue.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Glenn, no, I have multiple arguments.

    The EU running an alternative to NATO risks a security schism, as I wrote in a recent article here.

    The EU integrating too much is, I fear, going to lead it collapsing as the diametrically opposed drives to integrate forever and the desire of people for the ability to express their democratic freedom in national parliaments cause tension that brings a breaking point.
  • Options
    Noo said:

    SunnyJim said:

    Dura_Ace said:


    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.

    Hmmm...I think you may find Labour are the bloodthirsty party.

    Kosovo
    Afghanistan
    Iraq

    I would find the above far harder to defend than:

    The Falklands
    Gulf War I
    What were the Conservatives' positions on Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq?
    What were Labour's positions on the Falklands and the Gulf war?
    It's an eternal PB thing, Tories whimpering about how under noted peacemonger IDS they were fooled into showing the strongest parliamentary support of any party for Iraq by silver tongued devil Tony.

    I forget, has the Tory party ever expressed official regret over their part in enabling Iraq?
  • Options
    Apparently Kate Osamor's local party is balloting for deselection. First one on the left I've heard about.

    Perhaps employing her drug dealer son, then blaming everyone else, wasn't the genius move she assumed it to be?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited October 2019
    Triggered...she saw the Flora / Mumsnet thing?
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,904

    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
    They can't without Labour votes. Labour would have a legitimate reason for not agreeing to an election until they had elected a new leader. Watson could stand in or Corbyn could lead until another leader was chosen.
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    Apparently Kate Osamor's local party is balloting for deselection. First one on the left I've heard about.

    Perhaps employing her drug dealer son, then blaming everyone else, wasn't the genius move she assumed it to be?

    Juicy seat to get selected for
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited October 2019
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    I wonder whether the next resignation might be Corbyn? It would make sense. It's obvious that an election held in the next few months would be a disaster for Labour particularly if Johnson gets a deal. But there's nothing Corbyn can do to prevent one which wont be humiliating for both him and the party.........except resigning.

    He has a tailor made excuse. Age-after a five year term he'll be 76.

    It would have the duel effect of allowing Labour to choose someone more voter friendly and enable them without losing face to delay till such time as they could win.

    Could Corbyn's final act be his greatest?

    A tip from Sydney Carton perhaps...

    'It is a far far better thing that I do than I have ever done. It is a far far better rest that I go to than I have ever known...."

    He can't resign. If he does the other parties will go for the election with Labour rudderless
    They can't without Labour votes. Labour would have a legitimate reason for not agreeing to an election until they had elected a new leader. Watson could stand in or Corbyn could lead until another leader was chosen.
    As discussed on here many times, if the LDs or SNP want an election, the votes are there
    Watson standing in will mean the NEC has control as per the conference motion
    A party using a strategic resignation to try and avoid a GE will cost them another few %
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    SunnyJim said:

    Dura_Ace said:


    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.

    Hmmm...I think you may find Labour are the bloodthirsty party.

    Kosovo
    Afghanistan
    Iraq

    I would find the above far harder to defend than:

    The Falklands
    Gulf War I
    I'm struggling to find information / remember Kinnock's position on the Gulf War.

    So far I have
    Kosovo: William Hague in favour
    Afghanistan: IDS in favour
    Iraq: IDS in favour
    The Falklands: Foot in favour
    Gulf War I: Kinnock ?

    Which means that the Conservatives are at least as "bloodthirsty" on the basis of the five examples given. Possibly more so, but I'll assume Kinnock was in favour.

    Perhaps next time think before you type.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,835
    Is Jezza really planning to leave the Parliamentary Saturday sitting on Brexit, in order to speak to a rally in Liverpool?

    I am sure that he wants to dodge the #peoplesvote march again, but Parliament?!?
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Foxy said:

    Is Jezza really planning to leave the Parliamentary Saturday sitting on Brexit, in order to speak to a rally in Liverpool?

    I am sure that he wants to dodge the #peoplesvote march again, but Parliament?!?

    Odd way to force a referendum, losing one vote for
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,835
    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,071
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
    Having campaigned for the Libs and then the LibDems for many years, I still feel embarrassed by what Clegg agreed to.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,442
    edited October 2019
    delete
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,442
    Foxy said:

    Is Jezza really planning to leave the Parliamentary Saturday sitting on Brexit, in order to speak to a rally in Liverpool?

    I am sure that he wants to dodge the #peoplesvote march again, but Parliament?!?

    What do you expect from this old fool.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,568
    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,277
    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    Back in the day I was asking how many centre left parties would launch an aggressive war without UN approval at the behest of a Republican president on the justification of extremely dubious intelligence. At the time the LDs were the only UK wide part to oppose it. They were badly burned by the coalition and won’t be making that mistake again. Labour never got the absolute kicking over Iraq it deserved.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    The likelihood of a snap UK GE might be receding..

    We watched RTÉ news yesterday evening and there was an interesting observation made offhand by their Westminster correspondent who said, "there isn't a government here in the ordinary sense of the word", which I think is something that we've forgotten.

    It's only the 31st October deadline that has prevented an election from being called. Once that is past there will be an election, it will happen as soon as possible, which makes the date Thursday 12th December.
  • Options
    NooNoo Posts: 2,380


    Having campaigned for the Libs and then the LibDems for many years, I still feel embarrassed by what Clegg agreed to.

    To be fair to him, he got suckered in by the narrative that the UK was on the verge of some kind of Greek style bankruptcy. And to be even fairer, a lot of economic orthodoxy was being thrown out of the window at the time. Nowadays you have countries with debt in excessive of 200% GDP and investors aren't as worried as they were 10 years ago. QE, low inflation, low unemployment.. it's a new world. The austerity narrative, the bond markets, Clegg, and even some in Labour were still thinking in old terms.
    And so, priority for Clegg was "saving the UK from the previous Labour government". The narrative made sense at the time. Nowadays it looks a little more naive and tends to be trotted out only be those who haven't quite caught up.
    I switched away from the Lib Dems in the last two elections, but they've done their time now, and everyone has learned a bit more about the world. I'm probably switching back next election. Not least because the coalition now looks like an island of sanity in the receding distance. The Lib Dems deserve a share of the credit for that.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    The Express article refers to a'thumping 5% lead'. Perhaps the vote shares have been rounded.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,837
    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. G, be interesting (and quite possibly alarming) to see how Trump responds.

    If he does retreat, that'll make the right far, far from impressed. Maybe that impeachment could happen after all.

    That's a very British hypothesis. Withdrawal from foreign wars is wildly popular with Trump's base. The American right, excluding Boltonesque neo-cons, doesn't have the British right's enervating insecurity about its nation's place in the world.
    Not entirely. While the general point is true, it’s only the Senate which is relevant in this case, and a number of Republican senators are national security hawks.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,837
    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    Let's hope that US forces aren't faced with the dilemma that confronted the Dutch UN detachment at Srebrenica.
    Will they have to leg it with their tails between their legs. Erdogan was obviously not impressed by Trump's ravings about scrapping their economy.
    He has a point. If the US ends up trying to sanction or impose tariffs on everyone, they effectively do more to isolate themselves economically.
    The US has enormous economic power, but it is not unlimited - and not as hegemonic as even a decade back.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    anage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    Back in the day I was asking how many centre left parties would launch an aggressive war without UN approval at the behest of a Republican president on the justification of extremely dubious intelligence. At the time the LDs were the only UK wide part to oppose it. They were badly burned by the coalition and won’t be making that mistake again. Labour never got the absolute kicking over Iraq it deserved.
    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
    They could still have blocked it.

    A period of austerity was not the time to be reducing Income Tax - even via higher thresholds. The poorest gained nothing from that whilst losing a great deal from Benefit cuts and freezes.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,835
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
    They could still have blocked it.

    A period of austerity was not the time to be reducing Income Tax - even via higher thresholds. The poorest gained nothing from that whilst losing a great deal from Benefit cuts and freezes.
    Simply not true. The working poor gained significantly. It was a reditributive act as surely you can agree.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    philiph said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    My view is that there are about 8-12 seats in London and the South East that will be Brexit babies. (Yes, that few.)

    Hampstead. Wimbledon. Richmond Park. And a few others.

    Seats with 65% Remain shares that feel that both the Conservative and Labour Parties don't care about them.

    I think the LDs will manage some pretty big swings in those seats. (But there aren't many of them.)
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    If Farage can stay within a certain percentage of the Lib Dems we could yet avoid disaster.

    Nigel Farage the hero of liberal democracy, who'd have thought it...
    We can't avoid disaster because if Johnson loses Corbyn, who is Johnson on speed, gets in.

    Avoiding disaster requires either a genuine political earthquake or Corbyn to Leave post before the election.
    Given neither the Liberal Democrats or Farage are likely to put Corbyn in Number 10 that is not really true.

    Corbyn needs either a Labour majority or a Labour plus SNP plus Plaid plus Green majority to become PM
    If Johnson loses Corbyn becomes PM.

    Although I am amazed anyone can think of Johnson's record as anything but a disaster, so in a sense we haven't avoided it.
    I would suggest Johnson has no record as PM at this juncture. Judge him when he has enacted legislation rather than assumption, prejudice and expectation.
    @philiph

    Please let me know what you're smoking, and where I can get some.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480
    Rumours that Trump will drop Pence for a woman, if it looks like he’ll be up against Warren, continue to surface. However it is hard to see him having the political capital to drop his VP so late, particularly given his loyalty. Meanwhile the Trump-Pence 2020 boards are already appearing by the roadside.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,147
    IanB2 said:

    Rumours that Trump will drop Pence for a woman, if it looks like he’ll be up against Warren, continue to surface. However it is hard to see him having the political capital to drop his VP so late, particularly given his loyalty. Meanwhile the Trump-Pence 2020 boards are already appearing by the roadside.

    Ivanka?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,090

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480
    I see it’s taken the tunnel on Brexit to drive us back to the old favourites of Iraq and austerity.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168

    nico67 said:

    The great irony here .

    Mays deal effectively kept the UK in the orbit of the EU , to leave the backstop you’d need a very close relationship .

    The Labour argument against that deal does not stand up to scrutiny , it’s irrelevant what was in the political declaration .

    Mays deal narrowed the options , to leave the backstop you’d need alternative arrangements which clearly aren’t there .

    So in effect the WA meant only a very close EU relationship with strong alignment on rules and rights would remove the backstop .

    I think what we’ve seen is to be blunt the reality of politics, a lot of games , positioning in the party interest not the national one.

    And this is really what the Tories and Labour have been doing , indeed welcome to politics .

    Where this leaves us is with the hardest of Brexits as the Tories are likely to win the next election and without the constraints of the original deal free to run riot .

    That’s not to say I don’t want a deal as there’s very few good options left . I expect UK EU relations with a deal will improve and at least there’s an orderly exit.

    Johnson is proposing a very, very hard Brexit - one that has the potential to inflict significant damage to a number of manufacturing and services industries, with all the implications for jobs and public spending that will have. I am not sure how well it will stand up to the sustained scrutiny of an election campaign in which leaving itself is no longer an issue. Of course, Corbyn will be a huge benefit to Johnson, but most Brits will not want the low tax, low protection, low public spending Singapore-system the Tories are going to be offering. In short, my guess is that a post-Leave election does not work as well for them as a pre-Leave one.

    Boris wants a Canada style FTA with the EU not no deal and his Government is also spending significantly more on public services than the Tories were in the Coalition years with the LDs under Cameron and Osborne.

    O/T Was in Enniskillen this morning and passed Arlene Foster's constituency office but I don't think she was in
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    IanB2 said:

    I see it’s taken the tunnel on Brexit to drive us back to the old favourites of Iraq and austerity.

    I can tell you exactly when I last ate a pasty, and the train station I bought it from.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,837
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

  • Options
    eggegg Posts: 1,749
    justin124 said:

    The Express article refers to a'thumping 5% lead'. Perhaps the vote shares have been rounded.
    Front of the express calls it thumping 5% lead that will lead to an amazing 15 seat majority.

    I think everyone on PB now expect polls to narrow soon as gun is fired and focus turns from dispatch box to constituency’s, so all polls are meaningless until then.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    justin124 said:

    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.

    While I despise Blair almost as much as you do, I would gently suggest it is more than a little extreme to suggest he was more guilty on that head than Goering - or for that matter, Raeder, Neurath or Keitel.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,442
    AC: You think you can win a majority at the next election?

    John McDonnell: Yeah, I do.

    AC: You don't think you'd have to rely on the SNP or the Lib Dems?

    JM: No. Well, I think we can win a majority, but if we go into a minority government situation, there will be no deals, we'll just lay out our programme and they either support it or they don't. If they don't support it we'll go back to the country and it will be interesting, if they did, to see how they argue against a real living wage, investment in public services, restoration of trade union rights, tackling climate change. How can they argue against that?

    https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/john-mcdonnell-brexit-interview-2019
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    Rumours that Trump will drop Pence for a woman, if it looks like he’ll be up against Warren, continue to surface. However it is hard to see him having the political capital to drop his VP so late, particularly given his loyalty. Meanwhile the Trump-Pence 2020 boards are already appearing by the roadside.

    You think he 1) has the awareness to realise he doesnt have the political capital? and 2) cares? and 3) doesnt think his genius is enough to find a way to make it work?
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,277
    edited October 2019
    justin124 said:

    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:



    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.

    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    Back in the day I was asking how many centre left parties would launch an aggressive war without UN approval at the behest of a Republican president on the justification of extremely dubious intelligence. At the time the LDs were the only UK wide part to oppose it. They were badly burned by the coalition and won’t be making that mistake again. Labour never got the absolute kicking over Iraq it deserved.
    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.
    The lesson is that parties change and learn from their mistakes. The lesson that Labour has taken from the Blair years is Corbyn. The lesson that the LDs have taken from the coalition is that they get set up as the fall guy for the senior partner, so that won’t happen again. Corbyn is not acceptable to me and many other ex Labour voters - rather than blaming us perhaps some reflection on why we have left may be in order. Not that I care - I will never go back.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436

    AC: You think you can win a majority at the next election?

    John McDonnell: Yeah, I do.

    AC: You don't think you'd have to rely on the SNP or the Lib Dems?

    JM: No. Well, I think we can win a majority, but if we go into a minority government situation, there will be no deals, we'll just lay out our programme and they either support it or they don't. If they don't support it we'll go back to the country and it will be interesting, if they did, to see how they argue against a real living wage, investment in public services, restoration of trade union rights, tackling climate change. How can they argue against that?

    https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/john-mcdonnell-brexit-interview-2019

    By pointing out that Labour wouldn't achieve any of them and their conference motions were essentially a junket of asset-stripping, greed, spite, prejudice and ignorance masquerading as a programme for government?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
    Well and truly devilled.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
    They could still have blocked it.

    A period of austerity was not the time to be reducing Income Tax - even via higher thresholds. The poorest gained nothing from that whilst losing a great deal from Benefit cuts and freezes.
    Simply not true. The working poor gained significantly. It was a reditributive act as surely you can agree.
    The poorest gained nothing from raising Income Tax thresholds in that their earnings were too low to be liable to pay tax. They did lose significantly from the Coalition cuts to Benefits. Reducing Income Tax at the same time as slashing public spending was a very right wing policy - even if a cut in the basic rate would have been worse still. A reduction in VAT to 15% would have been more progressive.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    edited October 2019
    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:



    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.

    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    Back in the day I was asking how many centre left parties would launch an aggressive war without UN approval at the behest of a Republican president on the justification of extremely dubious intelligence. At the time the LDs were the only UK wide part to oppose it. They were badly burned by the coalition and won’t be making that mistake again. Labour never got the absolute kicking over Iraq it deserved.
    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.
    The lesson is that parties change and learn from their mistakes. The lesson that Labour has taken from the Blair years is Corbyn. The lesson that the LDs have taken from the coalition is that they get set up as the fall guy for the senior partner, so that won’t happen again. Corbyn is not acceptable to me and many other ex Labour voters - rather than blaming us perhaps some reflection on why we have left may be in order. Not that I care - I will never go back.
    Which is a bit ironic, since Corbyn is in many ways the reductio ad absurdum of Blairism - soundbite, division and hatred rather than constructive working, tribalism, flagrant dishonesty and an utter contempt for parliament and their party.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480

    AC: You think you can win a majority at the next election?

    John McDonnell: Yeah, I do.

    AC: You don't think you'd have to rely on the SNP or the Lib Dems?

    JM: No. Well, I think we can win a majority, but if we go into a minority government situation, there will be no deals, we'll just lay out our programme and they either support it or they don't. If they don't support it we'll go back to the country and it will be interesting, if they did, to see how they argue against a real living wage, investment in public services, restoration of trade union rights, tackling climate change. How can they argue against that?

    https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/john-mcdonnell-brexit-interview-2019


    Always remarkable how Labour assumes “trade union rights” means something reasonable. They would have zero chance of getting anything close to what they want through a balanced parliament, and neither would they have public support for it.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
    Well and truly devilled.
    Are you trying to poach my title?
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    DougSeal said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:



    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.

    That's largely down to Labour's choice of leader in each case, Foot and Corbyn. TAs they ay, those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it .

    You can't blame moderate ex-Labour members like myself voting Lib Dem when the Corbynistas have spent the last few years telling us to sod off.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    Back in the day I was asking how many centre left parties would launch an aggressive war without UN approval at the behest of a Republican president on the justification of extremely dubious intelligence. At the time the LDs were the only UK wide part to oppose it. They were badly burned by the coalition and won’t be making that mistake again. Labour never got the absolute kicking over Iraq it deserved.
    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.
    The lesson is that parties change and learn from their mistakes. The lesson that Labour has taken from the Blair years is Corbyn. The lesson that the LDs have taken from the coalition is that they get set up as the fall guy for the senior partner, so that won’t happen again. Corbyn is not acceptable to me and many other ex Labour voters - rather than blaming us perhaps some reflection on why we have left may be in order. Not that I care - I will never go back.
    I left the Labour Party at the end of 1996 and did not vote Labour again at a GE until 2015. Next time I will spoil my ballot paper - albeit for unrelated Gender Vetting reasons.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
    Well and truly devilled.
    Are you trying to poach my title?
    You made it look over easy.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,442
    ydoethur said:

    AC: You think you can win a majority at the next election?

    John McDonnell: Yeah, I do.

    AC: You don't think you'd have to rely on the SNP or the Lib Dems?

    JM: No. Well, I think we can win a majority, but if we go into a minority government situation, there will be no deals, we'll just lay out our programme and they either support it or they don't. If they don't support it we'll go back to the country and it will be interesting, if they did, to see how they argue against a real living wage, investment in public services, restoration of trade union rights, tackling climate change. How can they argue against that?

    https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/john-mcdonnell-brexit-interview-2019

    By pointing out that Labour wouldn't achieve any of them and their conference motions were essentially a junket of asset-stripping, greed, spite, prejudice and ignorance masquerading as a programme for government?
    Hope McDonnell has the IMF on speed dial.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    justin124 said:

    The poorest gained nothing from raising Income Tax thresholds in that their earnings were too low to be liable to pay tax. They did lose significantly from the Coalition cuts to Benefits. Reducing Income Tax at the same time as slashing public spending was a very right wing policy - even if a cut in the basic rate would have been worse still. A reduction in VAT to 15% would have been more progressive.

    One of the more bizarre economic acts of New Labour was to cut VAT to 15% for a few months then raise it back to 17.5%. That really was government by soundbite.

    I agree with you entirely though that if politicians are serious about cutting taxes for the poorest VAT would be a very good place to start.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
    Well and truly devilled.
    Are you trying to poach my title?
    You made it look over easy.
    Well, at least I didn't make a hash of it.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,480
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Meanwhile, in "the consequences of Trump's idiotic decision in Syria" news:
    https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1182756792675139584

    I think it would have to be a mistake surely? Whatever else Turkey are they aren't stupid. Are they using Islamist nutters on the ground?
    The Turkish army is demonstrating, in their inimitable way, that there are no locations of safety in which the Kurds can regroup or shelter.
    I see.
    You gave up Lucky , was I too hard boiled for you
    I couldn't go omletting you make an egg-sample of me.
    Well done what a finale
    A standing ova-tion is in order.

    I've been ovamatched and shall eggsit the punning contest.
    Well and truly devilled.
    Are you trying to poach my title?
    You made it look over easy.
    Well, at least I didn't make a hash of it.
    We would have scotched any move in that direction, for sure.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited October 2019
    ydoethur said:

    justin124 said:

    Blair was very much a centre-right figure - well to the right of people such as Macmillan, Eden,Butler, Macleod and Heath. He was a war criminal , and - with Bush - was more guilty under the Nuremberg indictment relating to 'Planning for War' than any of the Nazi leaders put on trial in 1945/46 - with the possible exception of Ribbentrop.
    I was happy to support the LDs under Charles Kennedy in both 2001 and 2005.

    While I despise Blair almost as much as you do, I would gently suggest it is more than a little extreme to suggest he was more guilty on that head than Goering - or for that matter, Raeder, Neurath or Keitel.
    I disagree. Goering did not want a war in 1939 at all. Raeder and Keitel were senior military personnel and had no role in political decision making at all. They were no more guilty than people on the British side such as Ironside - Dowding - Dudley Pound - or Alanbrooke.
    Neurath was not a Nazi and had been Foreign Minister before Hitler became Chancellor. He was close to Hindenburg and strongly disapproved of Hitler's aggressive war aims. He suffered a series of heart attacks in late 1937 after attending he conference where Hitler revealed his real intentions.
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 803
    It has been impressive how the Tories have made the question deal or no deal - which is a long way from the question of a hard or soft Brexit following the 2016 vote.

    The logic of the backstop was good for those in favour of a soft Brexit, as it tied the whole of the UK close to the EU. That is why the ERG hated it. The outlines of the new deal would not have the same constraints, and so a Conservative government could implement a very hard Brexit after the transition period.

    The key for the opposition of all stripes if Boris bets a deal with the EU will be to describe it as a hard Brexit and highlight what will be lost versus a soft Brexit, let alone remaining.
  • Options
    The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    Foxy said:

    justin124 said:

    OllyT said:

    OllyT said:

    Jonathan said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As a general rule, I think betting on the LibDems is for people with more money than sense. But I think they'll absolutely walk Richmond Park. If the majority is less than 7-8,000 I'd be very surprised.

    Do you remember that guy who became a regular on PB about 10 years ago. Think he lived in Canada. The poor sod bet his shirt on the Lib Dems, based purely on advice here. When he lost big time, the screams of agony were intolerable. He’s never been seen again. Buyer beware!
    The LDs role in this election appears to be to split the opposition vote and gift Boris a majority. It took 14 years to recover from that last time.
    We can blame moderate ex Labour members for letting the Tories win again by voting LD
    It's fairly arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't like the Tories are duty-bound to vote Labour. If Labour don't want to appeal to centre-left voters then that's their choice but it's no use moaning that they then vote for somebody else and "let the Tories in".
    But the Coaliton clearly showed the LDs to be a party of the Centre-Right!How many left of centre parties would have backed the introduction of significant fees re- Employment Tribunals?
    It wasn't an LD majority government!

    Raising the threshold for income tax, introducing the pupil premium were redistributive policies of LD origin.
    They could still have blocked it.

    A period of austerity was not the time to be reducing Income Tax - even via higher thresholds. The poorest gained nothing from that whilst losing a great deal from Benefit cuts and freezes.
    Simply not true. The working poor gained significantly. It was a reditributive act as surely you can agree.
    The poorest gained nothing from raising Income Tax thresholds in that their earnings were too low to be liable to pay tax. They did lose significantly from the Coalition cuts to Benefits. Reducing Income Tax at the same time as slashing public spending was a very right wing policy - even if a cut in the basic rate would have been worse still. A reduction in VAT to 15% would have been more progressive.
    I know people on JSA, who are basically umemployable and have not had their benefits increased since 2015. At least the coalition increased benefits, the Tories just freeze them or cut them. The welfare state has failed people under the Tories...
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    This is becoming tedious. I vote we return to discussing Breggsit.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,436
    IanB2 said:

    AC: You think you can win a majority at the next election?

    John McDonnell: Yeah, I do.

    AC: You don't think you'd have to rely on the SNP or the Lib Dems?

    JM: No. Well, I think we can win a majority, but if we go into a minority government situation, there will be no deals, we'll just lay out our programme and they either support it or they don't. If they don't support it we'll go back to the country and it will be interesting, if they did, to see how they argue against a real living wage, investment in public services, restoration of trade union rights, tackling climate change. How can they argue against that?

    https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/john-mcdonnell-brexit-interview-2019


    Always remarkable how Labour assumes “trade union rights” means something reasonable. They would have zero chance of getting anything close to what they want through a balanced parliament, and neither would they have public support for it.
    Glorious Freudian slip by Macdonnell:

    No, it isn't but it is a fair assessment that it will give us some. It will help us pay for some of our education in particular.

    I think he meant policies, but...
This discussion has been closed.