Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
I know I'm not the most sophisticated but my opinion of Keith Vaz has improved immensely since I heard about the prostitutes and cocaine. I'd prefer him to be in to that than sleazing money out of the taxpayer.
I like a bad boy/girl.
You seem to forget he was also expert expense claimer. And still many questions about how he has funded his lifestyle for many years.
Yeah, but like I said, my opinion of him has improved.
I used to think he was a sleazy, oily, social-climbing, over-promoted, supercilious wanker and now I still think he is all those things but at least he has a fun social life.
It seems he doesn't simply wank. He buys (unprotected) sex.
Except of course they didn't allow people to get on with their lives. They have introduced ever more rules, red tape and idiotic legislation which has made our lives infinitely more annoying and cumbersome.
The last Tory leader was a xenophobic, authoritarian nightmare who in her time as Home Secretary had made numerous terrible decisions which had caused real pain and hardship for many innocent people. We have had an ever increasingly complex tax system presided over by successive Chancellors who have done nothing to simplify it and have seen almost all of our important services - police, nurses, doctors and the fire service alienated by bad decisions and yet more red tape.
The Conservatives have not allowed people to "get on with their lives" for decades. They are little different from the Blairite Labour party or the Lib Dems which is why we need this revolution.
Though I actually doubt it will come unfortunately
I have to confess most of today's blizzard of partisan crap comments are just cluttering up this site but Richard as always provides something worth reading and considering.
The problem is Johnson is as much an interventionist as May. He is also a centraliser as he showed when Mayor of London when he took control of TfL and the Met directly into the Mayor's office. He will do the same and No.10 will be the place of influence with the Cabinet and Parliament side-lined.
He's also making spending commitments which would make an old-fashioned Labour CoE blush together with promising tax cuts to all and sundry so it's a debt-fuelled boom he's after for which we will end up paying later.
As you say, the modern Conservative seems to think not only that there is no problem which can't be solved by throwing money at it but also no problem which can't be solved by legislation or State intervention.
Yep I think I do need to clarify. My posting was as much a defence of those who voted for Brexit as a means for change as it was a defence of any individual politicians of any colour or persuasion.
I think the only way Boris continues the (rather muted perhaps) revolution is by accident and that in the end he will rightly be one of the victims of it. I won't mourn him if that happens. Basically I, and I believe others like me, are looking for anything that shakes up the system and ignites change without (hopefully) any resort to violence.
Our whole political system is currently unfit for purpose and I think those like Nigel who are bemoaning the loss of old fashioned Conservatism or the old fashioned political consensus and blaming Brexit for that are seriously misreading both the causes and the effects of this change.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
No.
Actually, I'm not sure you're right. Corbyn, Swinson, Sturgeon and Farage will all (for very different reasons) be keen on debates.
That leaves Boris. Can Boris really run away from debates, in such an important election? Boris, the great crowd pleaser, the people's PM, the jester who does well on TV? It will make him look cowardly and effete.
ALSO, Boris will be well aware of the damage TMay did to her campaign, by refusing TV debates.
I think Boris will agree. The Q is whether they can then settle on a format.
Interesting that the Guardian' verdict on PMQ's was that both Boris and Corbyn had their moments, Corbyn on the NHS, but Boris accusing labour of the party of two referendums, the EU and Scotland, and the dismay the public would feel at this never ending uncertainty.
They also referenced Boris's comments to the SNP on a border for Berwick and his strong defence of the Union
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
Disagree. Boris is a very poor speaker IMO – he mumbles and blusters.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
I think we will have them this time. Boris will believe he can beat Jez, doesn't need to automatically fear them like May who knew it was a bad for at for her. Being labelled a chicken would be damaging to his confident persona (also why no chance of him switching seats from Uxbridge). He also doesn't have enough of a lead to feel comfortable refusing them.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
Disagree. Boris is a very poor speaker IMO – he mumbles and blusters.
He's both. He's weirdly unpredictable. Sometimes Boris mumbles and blithers, as you say, but other times he is suddenly seized with articulacy, and comes across very well.
Corbyn is not dissimilar, tho Corbyn has an extra degree of petulant how-dare-you-ness, when he is queried.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
I live in a staunchly working class area. Everybody I know has SKY TV, an iphone, holidays abroad, a car, nice clothes. And I mean, EVERYBODY.
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Legalise drugs. Problem solved.
Bit trite but I sort of agree, though very difficult politically
Looking at opinion poll data, aggregating the poll share of "Progressive" and "Regressive" parties and adding trend lines, since August there has been an increase of around two percentage points in the "Regressive" share. Presumably this is down to Labour Leavers switching to the Brexit Party.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
Don't forget I'm just an ordinary Iman from Bristol....you said what on twitter, down with the Jews, Jezza Jezza Jezza he my man....oh we some how missed that when we were doing our background checks.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
Not an approach very compatible with BoZo's spending splurge and increased debt. I expect that to be short lived, before austerity with a vengeance. His magic money tree approach is classic pre election bribe attempt.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
You must have some basis for coming to such a sweepingly precise judgment - it sounds like a pimps justification. Not that I'm suggesting it is.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Legalise drugs. Problem solved.
Bit trite but I sort of agree, though very difficult politically
I think there's a fair chance legalising cannabis at least will be in the Labour and Liberal manifestos.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
You must have some basis for coming to such a sweepingly precise judgment - it sounds like a pimps justification. Not that I'm suggesting it is.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Legalise drugs. Problem solved.
Bit trite but I sort of agree, though very difficult politically
I think there's a fair chance legalising cannabis at least will be in the Labour and Liberal manifestos.
Isn't it already Lib Dem policy? And for Labour, I am going to guess they do the fudge that many American states have done for years, the old medical use only...you say what Timmy, you have some unprovable unspecified pain, here's your medical exemption card.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
I live in a staunchly working class area. Everybody I know has SKY TV, an iphone, holidays abroad, a car, nice clothes. And I mean, EVERYBODY.
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
I live in a staunchly working class area. Everybody I know has SKY TV, an iphone, holidays abroad, a car, nice clothes. And I mean, EVERYBODY.
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
That isn't quite what I said. It has worked, but the data shows in the past years (especially since the crash) that lower middle class / semi-skilled working class type demographics have seen their wages stagnate across the Western world.
In the past some average metrics of income etc have masked the fact that this demographic actually got richer and their place in metrics were actually being replaced by those who used to be poor*.
In recent history that hasn't been so much of the case.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
Featuring the leaders of the third and fourth parties in the last election held in June.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
You must have some basis for coming to such a sweepingly precise judgment - it sounds like a pimps justification. Not that I'm suggesting it is.
A debate with a set format would give Boris an opportunity to look the 17.4m in the eye - and appeal to them to go out and vote for him to get the job of Brexit done. Finally.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
You must have some basis for coming to such a sweepingly precise judgment - it sounds like a pimps justification. Not that I'm suggesting it is.
Christ on a unicycle.
You need to add a sarcasm emoji for the less discerning PBers.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
I live in a staunchly working class area. Everybody I know has SKY TV, an iphone, holidays abroad, a car, nice clothes. And I mean, EVERYBODY.
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
That isn't quite what I said. It has worked, but the data shows in the past years (especially since the crash) that lower middle class / semi-skilled working class type demographics have seen their wages stagnate.
In the past some average metrics of income etc have masked the fact that that demographic actually got richer and where being replaced by the poor. In recent history that hasn't been so much of the case.
I know, I'm just making a case - as a completely ordinary, not-brilliantly educated, working class bloke - for capitalism. A case that a lot of working class folks my age would recognise.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's a risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct questions. What he SHOULD be doing plenty of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations. He is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
It isn;t the working classes that capitalism hasn't worked for. Its the middle classes.
That why we have umpteen million 20 and 30something humanities grads earning thirty grand and paying seven hundred a month in rent or living at home with parents. With forty grand in student debt.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Legalise drugs. Problem solved.
Bit trite but I sort of agree, though very difficult politically
I think there's a fair chance legalising cannabis at least will be in the Labour and Liberal manifestos.
I think even Plod views cannabis with disinterest unless more's afoot. People will be putting it in cakes next.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
Disagree. Boris is a very poor speaker IMO – he mumbles and blusters.
He's both. He's weirdly unpredictable. Sometimes Boris mumbles and blithers, as you say, but other times he is suddenly seized with articulacy, and comes across very well.
Corbyn is not dissimilar, tho Corbyn has an extra degree of petulant how-dare-you-ness, when he is queried.
Fair, though Boris almost always mumbles and blithers - but sometimes it just works for him.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
Featuring the leaders of the third and fourth parties in the last election held in June.
The joke election? The election we voted in a referendum so that we'd never have to have it again election? The consequence-free kick Bishop Brennan up the arse election? The complete shitz n gigglez election? That one?
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Boris is upbeat, uplifting, believes in Britain, believes in YOU being able to make things better in Britain. In an election that wasn't about Brexit, he'd smash it with young people for his unalloyed optimism.
Given that the Brexit Party were only yesterday publicly deriding Bunter's Deal as a "toxic time-bomb", an electoral pact would be surprising, but stranger things happen at sea.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Yeah, there’s a poll at the top of the thread showing that 53% have an unfavourable opinion of him and 40% have a very unfavourable opinion of him, but let’s ignore that in favour of an anecdote about @Byronic’s mum.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Exactly. That is the appeal he has and millions WILL vote on that basis. It is one of the reasons I am (sadly) predicting a Con majority of 60 on Dec 12th.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Yeah, there’s a poll at the top of the thread showing that 53% have an unfavourable opinion of him and 40% have a very unfavourable opinion of him, but let’s ignore that in favour of an anecdote about @Byronic’s mum.
The other 47% who aren't unfavourable will get him over the line nicely.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
I'd say Swinson has a better chance of becoming PM than Corbyn.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
I'd say Swinson has a better chance of becoming PM than Corbyn.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Yeah, there’s a poll at the top of the thread showing that 53% have an unfavourable opinion of him and 40% have a very unfavourable opinion of him, but let’s ignore that in favour of an anecdote about @Byronic’s mum.
To extrapolate from "my mum" to millions is typical of @Byronic who is just making a fool of himself on a site like this.
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
If they want Brexit that makes sense.
Brexit is off if Boris does not get a majority
And I have not heard Farage on the media though I have heard rumours of peerages for both Farage and Tice
Weren't the rumours more along the lines of Tice saying that was their price for a deal? Because you know, that's how you run an anti-establishment insurgency.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Yeah, there’s a poll at the top of the thread showing that 53% have an unfavourable opinion of him and 40% have a very unfavourable opinion of him, but let’s ignore that in favour of an anecdote about @Byronic’s mum.
The other 47% who aren't unfavourable will get him over the line nicely.
I’ve already been tapped up for donations by the Conservative campaign director.
I must say, I’m hesitating. What am I donating for?
My biggest worry right now is on Conservative attitudes to balancing the budget and the macroeconomy.
Casino - I have been largely absent from PB.com since the 2017 GE, but I intend to return here for some likely fun over the next 6 weeks or so. Having previously had you down as a staunch supporter of the Blue Team, I am surprised to note the extent to which your current level of support is wavering and I note you make specific and entirely justified references to the Tories' apparent disregard towards balancing the budget going forward as well as the worrying state of the macro-economy. Are there other major issues which are concerning you? E.g. Boris' Leadership & Style of Gov't, Trade & Foreign Relations, The NHS, Defence, Recent M.P. Sackings, Cummings, etc ?
It isn;t the working classes that capitalism hasn't worked for. Its the middle classes.
That why we have umpteen million 20 and 30something humanities grads earning thirty grand and paying seven hundred a month in rent or living at home with parents. With forty grand in student debt.
Those are Corbyn's core, surely.
This is a southern issue - no shortage of affordable housing right across the north of England.
A graduate earning 30k in Leeds or Manchester can afford a nice home, two graduates can get a large house with garden in which to raise a family.
I spent last week at home in Lancashire visiting family, and capitalism has worked out pretty well for the middle classes. I grew up there in the 70s/80s, and even though both my parents worked in professional jobs, there were no foreign holidays until I was 16, we only got a new car when my Dad was given a company car, and going to eat out was a rare treat.
Living standards are as high as they have ever been for the middle classes, but then so are expectations of what they/their children should be able to afford.
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
If they want Brexit that makes sense.
Brexit is off if Boris does not get a majority
And I have not heard Farage on the media though I have heard rumours of peerages for both Farage and Tice
Weren't the rumours more along the lines of Tice saying that was their price for a deal? Because you know, that's how you run an anti-establishment insurgency.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Prostitution is often forced. In which case there IS a victim.
Have you done a survey?
You will recall the cases of Rotherham, Rochdale, etc. so the question is otiose.
Granted, Parliament itself is unclear about the extent of the problem: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmhaff/26/26.pdf We were dismayed to discover the poor quality of information available about the extent and nature of prostitution in England and Wales. Without a proper evidence base, the Government cannot make informed decisions about the effectiveness of current legislation and policies, and cannot target funding and support interventions effectively...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840059/Modern_Slavery_Report_2019.pdf Referrals of potential victims3 to the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), the UK’s identification and support system for victims of modern slavery.4 In 2018, there were 6,9855 potential victims referred to the NRM (a 36% increase from 2017), of whom 45% (3,128) were exploited as children. NRM data is taken from a live management system and as such, subject to change as new information is discovered and records updated accordingly. The data used within this report is accurate as of 12 July 2019.... ...The most robust estimate to date of the scale of modern slavery in the UK was produced by the Home Office in 2014, which suggested that there were between 10,000 and 13,000 potential victims of modern slavery in the UK in 2013....
As with the legalisation of drugs, a more legally permissive, but at the same time far tougher regulated approach might well be sensible.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Prostitution is often forced. In which case there IS a victim.
Have you done a survey?
No because, the original claim is that there are NO victims from the trade in prostitution or cocaine. It is victim-free.
To disprove this, we do not need to carry out a statistical analysis on how much is forced or not.
We just need to find some victims.
Try googling "Vietnamese children working in cannabis farms" or "Vietnamese children trafficked to brothels". There is evidence aplenty that there are real victims.
What do you think would have happened to the 39 heavily indebted Vietnamese in Mo Robinson's refrigerated truck, if they lived ?
If we’re doing mum anecdotes, my mum has voted Conservative in every election since she first could in 1964 and voted Leave. She loathes Boris Johnson and I think she’ll abstain. She seems to be quite typical of a certain type of older woman, if Facebook is anything to go by.
How ridiculous to have Lib Dems as a major party, they could not fill a minibus. They need Tory and Labour switchers to break double figures. Pygmy party more like.
Not in terms of votes, only in terms of our hopeless voting system
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
My mum said, the other day, "I hate Boris. He is a disgusting lying sack of shit."
(I paraphrase, but only slightly). He certainly does not have the mum vote sewn up.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Plenty of young black gang victims of drug-related knife crime. For those who can see that their drug-taking causes terrible consequences. You might even call them victims....
Also, all prostitutes go into the job entirely voluntarily with their eyes wide open and are completely undamaged by the experience. Thank goodness.
You must have some basis for coming to such a sweepingly precise judgment - it sounds like a pimps justification. Not that I'm suggesting it is.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
My mum said, the other day, "I hate Boris. He is a disgusting lying sack of shit."....
I've been observing elections since 1992 and most of the time the polls have been a pretty accurate guide to what's going on, with a few exceptions.
I think there's a danger of not paying enough regard to the polls this time. Would not surprise me if the result is close to those EC numbers you posted there. In fact it would surprise me if it isn't.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
My advice on debates would be for Boris to take the Thatcher route and to demolish socialism and not the proponents of socialism. There was nobody better than her at articulating the benefits of a free-market over what she termed a 'pitiless ideology'.
Boris is pretty good with words and my advice would be to do the debates and excoriate the ideology, not Corbyn himself.
That's quite risky as there are a lot of people who just don't feel that capitalism is working for them. The famous elephant graph of world progress basically shows capitalism has continued to be a massive success for the world over the past 25 years, but lower middle class westerners are the ones who have found their income stagnating.
I live in a staunchly working class area. Everybody I know has SKY TV, an iphone, holidays abroad, a car, nice clothes. And I mean, EVERYBODY.
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
That isn't quite what I said. It has worked, but the data shows in the past years (especially since the crash) that lower middle class / semi-skilled working class type demographics have seen their wages stagnate.
In the past some average metrics of income etc have masked the fact that that demographic actually got richer and where being replaced by the poor. In recent history that hasn't been so much of the case.
I know, I'm just making a case - as a completely ordinary, not-brilliantly educated, working class bloke - for capitalism. A case that a lot of working class folks my age would recognise.
The economic question is to what extent that list of consumer products and services has been paid for and to what extent financed by borrowing?
Farage's problem if his party doesn't stand in vast swathes of the country is that he'll struggle to make a case for broadcast parity, for involvement in leadership debates and so on.
Is it worth sacrificing meaningful access to the air war in exchange for the Tories soft pedaling in a couple of places? I'm not sure it is myself.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
She probably laughs at you as well, masquerading as a male model and all, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to be the next Prime Minister...
Given that the Brexit Party were only yesterday publicly deriding Bunter's Deal as a "toxic time-bomb", an electoral pact would be surprising, but stranger things happen at sea.
My mum always had it that worse things happen at sea
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
Could be like a DIY election pact. Choose a couple of dozen Labour seats that aren't obvious Tory targets and claim that the Tories will not campaign hard in them as a quid pro quo for Brexit Party not standing everywhere.
The Tories don't campaign hard in them because they would be a waste of resources, regardless of what the Brexit Party were doing.
Farage claims the credit for Johnson's election victory. Could look like the least humiliating way out for Farage who we must remember stepped away from UKIP when he could see exactly what was about to happen to them.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Yeah, there’s a poll at the top of the thread showing that 53% have an unfavourable opinion of him and 40% have a very unfavourable opinion of him, but let’s ignore that in favour of an anecdote about @Byronic’s mum.
To extrapolate from "my mum" to millions is typical of @Byronic who is just making a fool of himself on a site like this.
lol. Did I say ALL OF BRITAIN will vote for Boris coz they like him?
No. But millions will. That's certain. The presence of Boris in the Leave campaign won it for Leave, as Cameron know, all too well, when he heard that Boris had switched sides.
Your hatred of Boris blinds you to his electoral appeal, in certain areas of the electorate.
A poster on here asked if Sir Lynton Crosby was running the Tory campaign. Telegraph say he is involved and also Cummings is involved.
Manifesto ideas are coming from 8 Cabinet Ministers and pulled together by Munira Mirza and Rachel Wolff, so said to be women friendly.
I'd be incredibly surprised if both Crosby and Cummings were actively involved. They actively loathe each other by all accounts, and neither will submit to the other leading.
You can only have one campaign mastermind, and the rest need to know that they are in undisputed command. You cannot afford power struggles during a six week campaign - it's absolutely fatal.
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
Could be like a DIY election pact. Choose a couple of dozen Labour seats that aren't obvious Tory targets and claim that the Tories will not campaign hard in them as a quid pro quo for Brexit Party not standing everywhere.
The Tories don't campaign hard in them because they would be a waste of resources, regardless of what the Brexit Party were doing.
Farage claims the credit for Johnson's election victory. Could look like the least humiliating way out for Farage who we must remember stepped away from UKIP when he could see exactly what was about to happen to them.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
I'd say Swinson has a better chance of becoming PM than Corbyn.
LibDem wannabes, hasbeens and half-bakedbeens deserve Swinson, the rest of us don't so I'd welcome your reasoning so I can sleep at night.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Heh. Guido got hold of O'Mara's Twitter account, and is posting all the unflattering stories about him. https://twitter.com/jaredomaramp
Probably time to leave O'Mara alone now.
I was critical when he left his seat unrepresented, and would neither give up his salary nor make proper arrangements.
But it's also clear he has mental health problems, and the resignation issue has now been superceded by an election. He's also facing a criminal investigation that must run its course.
Continuing to jab has no purpose any more, and is cruel to a fragile individual.
I agree.
It is interesting to look at the attitudes of posters on this board to say Chris Davies, Jared O'Mara and Keith Vaz. Three bad boys.
It is clear to me that the baddest is Vaz. Prostitution and cocaine.
However, it is Davies and O'Mara who have the LibDems in a towering rage. The LibDems fulminate about their badness.
Yet, their offences seem minor to me. And O'Mara clearly needs help not censure.
I wonder why. It looks as the the really bad thing that Chris Davies and Jared O'Mara did was occupy LibDem target seats.
Oh don't get me wrong, I view Vaz as much, much more malignant than either O'Mara or Davies. A seriously odious individual who has perpetuated damage to our political system for a very long time.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
My mum said, the other day, "I hate Boris. He is a disgusting lying sack of shit."
(I paraphrase, but only slightly). He certainly does not have the mum vote sewn up.
Well I've got a wife and 2 grown up daughters and their opinion of Bozo cannot be repeated on a family programme. And it's nothing to do with Brexit - it's all about his attitude to women.
I think most of the people who post on here are men - Cyclefree and Beverly are the only women I see on here regularly AFAIK. But I think many many women will share my female relatives' antipathy to Bozo's louche and disreputable personal life.
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
Could be like a DIY election pact. Choose a couple of dozen Labour seats that aren't obvious Tory targets and claim that the Tories will not campaign hard in them as a quid pro quo for Brexit Party not standing everywhere.
The Tories don't campaign hard in them because they would be a waste of resources, regardless of what the Brexit Party were doing.
Farage claims the credit for Johnson's election victory. Could look like the least humiliating way out for Farage who we must remember stepped away from UKIP when he could see exactly what was about to happen to them.
If this means Brexit Party only STAND in a couple of dozen seats, they've got no case for broadcasting parity, or indeed more than a negligible slice of the air war.
If it means they stand in 600 but are only active in 24, they are still taking 10% in a lot of those 576 seats - the ground war only matters so much and plenty of people will vote Brexit Party if they can, even without extensive leafleting.
Who is going to bankroll 600 deposits and the campaign for the Brexit party ?
Banks (Who always reminds me of a certain character in the Wind in the Willows) seems to be on the Tories side right now.
Tice's interviews so far have been VERY soft pedalled too.
I oversaw the printing of the UKIP leaflets* in 2015, when they asked an agency to collate all the printing and mailing into one hub. The agency used us and I think we printed an average of 45,000 leaflets for just under 600 constituencies. It was a couple of hundred grand of printing for us. The mailing and postage would've been very expensive but I think the taxpayer pays that.
It was a hell of an operation to get all those leaflets around the country in a fortnight and fair play to the money people who altruistically give that. UKIP won one seat! Painful.
*We had no political allegiance. We were just chosen as the print company.
Sexual harrassment and abuse is worse in my eyes than either prostitution or drugs.
One has a victim, the other two does not.
Prostitution is often forced. In which case there IS a victim.
Have you done a survey?
No because, the original claim is that there are NO victims from the trade in prostitution or cocaine. It is victim-free.
To disprove this, we do not need to carry out a statistical analysis on how much is forced or not.
We just need to find some victims.
Try googling "Vietnamese children working in cannabis farms" or "Vietnamese children trafficked to brothels". There is evidence aplenty that there are real victims.
What do you think would have happened to the 39 heavily indebted Vietnamese in Mo Robinson's refrigerated truck, if they lived ?
There’s no doubt that the drugs trade takes a dreadful toll in lives but it doesn’t have to. It is exactly the same issue as with the rise in crime during American prohibition.
Be careful with naming defendants in comments about active proceedings BTW.
A poster on here asked if Sir Lynton Crosby was running the Tory campaign. Telegraph say he is involved and also Cummings is involved.
Manifesto ideas are coming from 8 Cabinet Ministers and pulled together by Munira Mirza and Rachel Wolff, so said to be women friendly.
I'd be incredibly surprised if both Crosby and Cummings were actively involved. They actively loathe each other by all accounts, and neither will submit to the other leading.
You can only have one campaign mastermind, and the rest need to know that they are in undisputed command. You cannot afford power struggles during a six week campaign - it's absolutely fatal.
They did not state it explicitly but implied the head of the Campaign is Ivan Levido, used to work for Crosby.
The advantage Corbyn has in debates is he has spent 40 years rehearsing his lines and now there is enough of an audience willing to at least listen to his crack pot ideas as an alternative to their stagnating incomes etc due to globalisation.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
Yes. Corbyn believes in what he says. He's a conviction politician. Johnson doesn't and isn't. That could become apparent in a TV debate of any depth. Perhaps Johnson could mask his essential vacuousness with 'persona' - as he is skilled at doing - but it's risk. If I were his adviser I would tell him to avoid one on ones with Corbyn. If he has to do a debate for the optics I would ensure it was a scrum with multiple players, the sort of affair where Johnson does not have to speak at length or field too many direct individual questions. What he SHOULD be doing a lot of, I would tell him, is bantering and clowning around with the public in unstructured situations, he is better at that stuff than almost any politician I can think of. "You're a lightweight, Boris, so keep it light," would be my mantra.
My mum said, the other day, "I like Boris. He makes me laugh".
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
My mum said, the other day, "I hate Boris. He is a disgusting lying sack of shit."
(I paraphrase, but only slightly). He certainly does not have the mum vote sewn up.
Well I've got a wife and 2 grown up daughters and their opinion of Bozo cannot be repeated on a family programme. And it's nothing to do with Brexit - it's all about his attitude to women.
I think most of the people who post on here are men - Cyclefree and Beverly are the only women I see on here regularly AFAIK. But I think many many women will share my female relatives' antipathy to Bozo's louche and disreputable personal life.
I'm also a female poster, I have voted for people I didn't like in the past (e.g. Salmond) but would not vote for Boris. I'm in my mid 40s.
Vox pop of parent earlier in the week (mid 70s) - she can't stand the bumbling overgrown public schoolboy persona, but his shambolic home life wasn't an issue for her.
They could be a game-changer. Boris could blow up under questioning about his private life, Corbyn could deliver some NHS zingers (or be skewered by his terror apologia), Swinson could have a Cleggasm and soar to pole position.
But, will there be debates?
There should be. Let's hope there are.
Issue is format. You know that SKY and Channel 4 will just want a format that stands most chance of damaging Boris. Which means having about 11 party leaders, all vying to take most lumps out of him. Farage? Sure. DUP? The more the merrier. Greta? Be our guest.....
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
I'd say Swinson has a better chance of becoming PM than Corbyn.
LibDem wannabes, hasbeens and half-bakedbeens deserve Swinson, the rest of us don't so I'd welcome your reasoning so I can sleep at night.
The reasoning is surely that Corbyn has a low ceiling - too many who won't vote for him, such that it almost completely rules him out. Swinson's Lib Dems will probably finish behind Labour but, if they do get some good polling in the campaign, the ceiling on the potential support is pretty high.
This, incidentally, has always been Farage's problem getting himself and others into Parliament. They poll okay sometimes, but the ceiling on their support is too low to translate it into seats.
If we’re doing mum anecdotes, my mum has voted Conservative in every election since she first could in 1964 and voted Leave. She loathes Boris Johnson and I think she’ll abstain. She seems to be quite typical of a certain type of older woman, if Facebook is anything to go by.
Looking at the poll above, both anecdotes work don’t they? He massively polarises on remain/leave lines; but within that has a bit of an issue with women.
Didn’t strike me as anything groundbreaking. The election will decided on Boris delivering in Leave seats the Tories don’t have, the LibDems taking some of the 2017 vote off Labour, and the Tories clinging on in the SE.
But we all sort of knew that.
What struck me earlier is that Corbyn’s fence sitting on the EU might yet end up a virtue, and give him space on everything else of his choosing.
As an aside, I want to get Brexit done. While I am not the greatest fan of Boris's deal, it'll do.
But I am also loathe to vote for someone I believe to be fundamentally dishonest, and for whom process is an anathema. At some point, it's not merely a matter of "are they on my side", but it's also a question of whether I am prepared to be complicit in someone who is weakening our instutitions.
lol. Did I say ALL OF BRITAIN will vote for Boris coz they like him?
No. But millions will. That's certain. The presence of Boris in the Leave campaign won it for Leave, as Cameron know, all too well, when he heard that Boris had switched sides.
Your hatred of Boris blinds you to his electoral appeal, in certain areas of the electorate.
I do sense that this is right. I was walking through a tunnel the other evening and moving quickly because there was a bunch of 'lads' behind me - a bit rough sounding - and they were being raucous. Heard the following exchange -
"Fucking Boris eh?"
"Yeah, love him. Fucking player inni."
Millions? Quite possibly. This country is not full of political sophisticates.
Rumours on Twitter that BXP have decided to target just a few winnable seats, largely avoiding the Tories?
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
Could be like a DIY election pact. Choose a couple of dozen Labour seats that aren't obvious Tory targets and claim that the Tories will not campaign hard in them as a quid pro quo for Brexit Party not standing everywhere.
The Tories don't campaign hard in them because they would be a waste of resources, regardless of what the Brexit Party were doing.
Farage claims the credit for Johnson's election victory. Could look like the least humiliating way out for Farage who we must remember stepped away from UKIP when he could see exactly what was about to happen to them.
The rumours stem from Banks’s earlier tweet. There is the slight problem that BXP already has a shedload of candidates in place and pre-announced, who have started campaigning, but I guess they will all do whatever the Chairman of Brexit Party Ltd. tells them.
A poster on here asked if Sir Lynton Crosby was running the Tory campaign. Telegraph say he is involved and also Cummings is involved.
Manifesto ideas are coming from 8 Cabinet Ministers and pulled together by Munira Mirza and Rachel Wolff, so said to be women friendly.
I'd be incredibly surprised if both Crosby and Cummings were actively involved. They actively loathe each other by all accounts, and neither will submit to the other leading.
You can only have one campaign mastermind, and the rest need to know that they are in undisputed command. You cannot afford power struggles during a six week campaign - it's absolutely fatal.
They did not state it explicitly but implied the head of the Campaign is Ivan Levido, used to work for Crosby.
Ah, but that's not the same as Crosby being involved. Perfectly possible Levido is more compatible with Cummings, or is willing to be for career progression. What would be a disaster is Cummings and Crosby both involved - whose lead do the staff follow? To whom are they loyal?
Comments
I think the only way Boris continues the (rather muted perhaps) revolution is by accident and that in the end he will rightly be one of the victims of it. I won't mourn him if that happens. Basically I, and I believe others like me, are looking for anything that shakes up the system and ignites change without (hopefully) any resort to violence.
Our whole political system is currently unfit for purpose and I think those like Nigel who are bemoaning the loss of old fashioned Conservatism or the old fashioned political consensus and blaming Brexit for that are seriously misreading both the causes and the effects of this change.
That leaves Boris. Can Boris really run away from debates, in such an important election? Boris, the great crowd pleaser, the people's PM, the jester who does well on TV? It will make him look cowardly and effete.
ALSO, Boris will be well aware of the damage TMay did to her campaign, by refusing TV debates.
I think Boris will agree. The Q is whether they can then settle on a format.
They also referenced Boris's comments to the SNP on a border for Berwick and his strong defence of the Union
I think we will have them this time. Boris will believe he can beat Jez, doesn't need to automatically fear them like May who knew it was a bad for at for her. Being labelled a chicken would be damaging to his confident persona (also why no chance of him switching seats from Uxbridge). He also doesn't have enough of a lead to feel comfortable refusing them.
Corbyn is not dissimilar, tho Corbyn has an extra degree of petulant how-dare-you-ness, when he is queried.
Boris changes position every 5 minutes.
The potential PMs please. Boris v. Corbyn. That would be worth a watch. The rest? Nah....
When I grew up in the 80s, watching the miner's strikes in my street, my father worked 60-70 hours a week and we could never afford a holiday. I walked home from school every day in the pissing down rain because we didn't have a car. My grandfather worked for the NCB for 50 years and didn't venture abroad until he was in his 50s.
I live in the same village I grew up in and I've been on holiday abroad three times this year. I'm supposed to be going to Vegas next week with the rugby boys but pulled out due to work commitments.
I disagree that capitalism hasn't worked for the working classes. It has, they just don't appreciate it.
If so, that is surely BIG news, and very positive for Boris.
BUT I can find no reliable source. So its probably crap. Sadly.
Heck, Boris should let Farage have a free run if he offers that.
In the past some average metrics of income etc have masked the fact that this demographic actually got richer and their place in metrics were actually being replaced by those who used to be poor*.
In recent history that hasn't been so much of the case.
Featuring the leaders of the third and fourth parties in the last election held in June.
Brexit is off if Boris does not get a majority
And I have not heard Farage on the media though I have heard rumours of peerages for both Farage and Tice
If they do, he will have a very solid majority.
But it depends what Cummings has wargamed.
That why we have umpteen million 20 and 30something humanities grads earning thirty grand and paying seven hundred a month in rent or living at home with parents. With forty grand in student debt.
Those are Corbyn's core, surely.
Millions will vote on that basis. Boris is not depressing. Corbyn is.
Having previously had you down as a staunch supporter of the Blue Team, I am surprised to note the extent to which your current level of support is wavering and I note you make specific and entirely justified references to the Tories' apparent disregard towards balancing the budget going forward as well as the worrying state of the macro-economy.
Are there other major issues which are concerning you? E.g. Boris' Leadership & Style of Gov't, Trade & Foreign Relations, The NHS, Defence, Recent M.P. Sackings, Cummings, etc ?
A graduate earning 30k in Leeds or Manchester can afford a nice home, two graduates can get a large house with garden in which to raise a family.
I spent last week at home in Lancashire visiting family, and capitalism has worked out pretty well for the middle classes. I grew up there in the 70s/80s, and even though both my parents worked in professional jobs, there were no foreign holidays until I was 16, we only got a new car when my Dad was given a company car, and going to eat out was a rare treat.
Living standards are as high as they have ever been for the middle classes, but then so are expectations of what they/their children should be able to afford.
/four yorkshire man mode OFF/
Granted, Parliament itself is unclear about the extent of the problem:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmhaff/26/26.pdf
We were dismayed to discover the poor quality of information available about the extent and nature of prostitution in England and Wales. Without a proper evidence base, the Government cannot make informed decisions about the effectiveness of current legislation and policies, and cannot target funding and support interventions effectively...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840059/Modern_Slavery_Report_2019.pdf
Referrals of potential victims3 to the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), the UK’s identification and support system for victims of modern slavery.4 In 2018, there were 6,9855 potential victims referred to the NRM (a 36% increase from 2017), of whom 45% (3,128) were exploited as children. NRM data is taken from a live management system and as such, subject to change as new information is discovered and records updated accordingly. The data used within this report is accurate as of 12 July 2019....
...The most robust estimate to date of the scale of modern slavery in the UK was produced by the Home Office in 2014, which suggested that there were between 10,000 and 13,000 potential victims of modern slavery in the UK in 2013....
As with the legalisation of drugs, a more legally permissive, but at the same time far tougher regulated approach might well be sensible.
To disprove this, we do not need to carry out a statistical analysis on how much is forced or not.
We just need to find some victims.
Try googling "Vietnamese children working in cannabis farms" or "Vietnamese children trafficked to brothels". There is evidence aplenty that there are real victims.
What do you think would have happened to the 39 heavily indebted Vietnamese in Mo Robinson's refrigerated truck, if they lived ?
Manifesto ideas are coming from 8 Cabinet Ministers and pulled together by Munira Mirza and Rachel Wolff, so said to be women friendly.
Proper ones, I mean, not on channel 5.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/thurrock
(I paraphrase, but only slightly). He certainly does not have the mum vote sewn up.
Is it worth sacrificing meaningful access to the air war in exchange for the Tories soft pedaling in a couple of places? I'm not sure it is myself.
Banks (Who always reminds me of a certain character in the Wind in the Willows) seems to be on the Tories side right now.
Tice's interviews so far have been VERY soft pedalled too.
The Tories don't campaign hard in them because they would be a waste of resources, regardless of what the Brexit Party were doing.
Farage claims the credit for Johnson's election victory. Could look like the least humiliating way out for Farage who we must remember stepped away from UKIP when he could see exactly what was about to happen to them.
No. But millions will. That's certain. The presence of Boris in the Leave campaign won it for Leave, as Cameron know, all too well, when he heard that Boris had switched sides.
Your hatred of Boris blinds you to his electoral appeal, in certain areas of the electorate.
You can only have one campaign mastermind, and the rest need to know that they are in undisputed command. You cannot afford power struggles during a six week campaign - it's absolutely fatal.
Like this story: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/watch-the-undercover-footage-that-allegedly-shows-labour-peer-lord-sewel-snorting-cocaine-with-two-10417927.html
O'Mara is just the 'comic relief' in that play.
I think most of the people who post on here are men - Cyclefree and Beverly are the only women I see on here regularly AFAIK. But I think many many women will share my female relatives' antipathy to Bozo's louche and disreputable personal life.
If it means they stand in 600 but are only active in 24, they are still taking 10% in a lot of those 576 seats - the ground war only matters so much and plenty of people will vote Brexit Party if they can, even without extensive leafleting.
It was a hell of an operation to get all those leaflets around the country in a fortnight and fair play to the money people who altruistically give that. UKIP won one seat! Painful.
*We had no political allegiance. We were just chosen as the print company.
Be careful with naming defendants in comments about active proceedings BTW.
The simplifiers (in order of level of simplification) were:
Geoffrey Howe
Kenneth Clarke
Nigel Lawson
The worst complicators were Brown, Lamont and Healey.
I give Darling a tiny amount of credit for rewinding a few of the worst bits of Brown.
Vox pop of parent earlier in the week (mid 70s) - she can't stand the bumbling overgrown public schoolboy persona, but his shambolic home life wasn't an issue for her.
This, incidentally, has always been Farage's problem getting himself and others into Parliament. They poll okay sometimes, but the ceiling on their support is too low to translate it into seats.
Didn’t strike me as anything groundbreaking. The election will decided on Boris delivering in Leave seats the Tories don’t have, the LibDems taking some of the 2017 vote off Labour, and the Tories clinging on in the SE.
But we all sort of knew that.
What struck me earlier is that Corbyn’s fence sitting on the EU might yet end up a virtue, and give him space on everything else of his choosing.
But I am also loathe to vote for someone I believe to be fundamentally dishonest, and for whom process is an anathema. At some point, it's not merely a matter of "are they on my side", but it's also a question of whether I am prepared to be complicit in someone who is weakening our instutitions.
"Fucking Boris eh?"
"Yeah, love him. Fucking player inni."
Millions? Quite possibly. This country is not full of political sophisticates.