Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The b
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
True. And this has been well-noted by Scots, who are about to punish
Labour will only have a chance of bouncing back in Scotland after independence IMO.
Same with the Tories.
Unionism seems to be driving certain Scottish social democrats and conservatives quite literally bonkers. Only the process of Scotland becoming a normal country is likely to regain the loonies their sanity.
If the Union survives another decade - a big if - the SLDs will take over the leadership of Unionism for the remainder of the period.
If the Union is dissolved, I expect a powerful bounce for both Labour and Tories. The SNP are not going to have much fun after the initial post-independence GE. And I for one certainly won’t be hanging about to help them.
I do not want the UK to break-up, but that’s because I’m English and on the left! I envy the choice that the Scots have. I can see Labour staying Labour post-independence, but what would the Tories call themselves? Conservatives without the Unionist bit?
Good morning
I am far from convinced the Scots will vote for independence.
The idea that the Scots will break away from their main market and install a Berwick to Carlisle border is far from certain but there will be many thousands more issues to enable a divorce of our 400 year old relationship
52 Yes 48 No and Boris says that's not good enough for separation is my forecast!
Presumably when they rejoined the EU and handed their independence over to Brussels, they would be forced to install a hard border ...
on the topic of NI and the DUP in particular, have the Tories (No 10 in particular) burned their bridges irrevocably in the event of a NOM Con win? or will we see another attempt to build a condfidence and supply based on a steady supply if cash and vague promises.
I think another C&S agreement between the Tories and the DUP is very unlikely with the distinct cooling of relations on both sides, certainly for as long as Boris remains PM. The numbers just happened to work almost perfectly last time. It would be surprising if this were to be the case again, but you never know. I would imagine that the Tories, armed with any sort of majority to their name, will make the implementation of the long overdue boundary changes, badly allowed let slip by Cameron, one of their top priorities.
Boundary reform will (or certainly ought to) be the number 2 Tory priority in
A wobbly Remain alliance, indeed. Led by whom, exactly? Not Corbyn. Also not anyone who isn't leader of the Labour party, barring a complete electoral meltdown. And Corbyn isn't going anywhere - why should he? He's still extremely popular among the members, and that's unlikely to change even if he loses 50+ seats.
Led by Corbyn. TINA. Forget anything that Swinson has said about not putting JC into office, that's for the consumption of Tory-LD floating voters and will be cast aside as soon as the polling stations close.
Corbyn himself won't stand aside and his supporters won't entertain the suggestion. If the Conservatives fail to win a majority then he'll be Prime Minister by Christmas.
Well, probably. But that does require Swinson and many of her MPs to have been fast asleep during the Coalition years. I suspect the penalty at the ballot box for enabling Corbyn from this point would be greater than for the tuition fees debacle.
Lib Dems will not support Corbyn or Johnson in coalition or confidence and supply. The membership and defections from both Tory and Lab parliamentary parties will prevent that.
A hung parliament would be headed to new elections in the spring with new Lab and possibly Con leaderships.
Where no deal might be on the table? The LDs would really allow that?
There might be support on certain issues, such as for an A50 extension and referendum, but that is as far as it would go. I cannot see support for a Labour Queens speech or budget for example, unless it was heavily attenuated to the most bland cross party provisions.
I saw your comment last night (thanks), and the weight of evidence is that you are incorrect.
Although the Auld Alliance was going through a quiet phase at the time of Agincourt, it was hardly void. The weight of evidence is that it is highly likely that individual Scottish knights, and even possibly a modest Scottish unit, fought under French royal command at Agincourt. Certainly, in the aftermath of the defeat, the Scots sent approx 15,000 troops to France to assist their allies, initially very successfully.
So “we” is nonsense. Although not as nonsensical as when Scots say “we” in reference to the Armada, where Scots support for the Spanish is well-documented. Not that the BBC and other diddies care for inconveniences like historical fact.
So what you are saying is that an independent Scotland would be a security risk?
Err... very few countries have the same allies now as they had during the medieval period. Or the same foes!
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
But we have to update our understanding of what poverty entails as time passes and society develops. If we didn't do that, someone in straitened circumstances in the 70s would have been deemed to have never had it so good compared to, say, Bob Cratchit and Tiny Tim.
Likewise, today, a mobile telephonic device with internet access - "smartphone" - is quite rightly considered an essential tool of modern life. If you are 15 and cannot afford one, it is likely to lead to exclusion and isolation. This is child poverty - where the poverty is poverty not "poverty". The fact that smartphones did not exist in 1979 does not make them merely a "nice to have" in 2019.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
You don’t have to vote for him, regardless of whether he wins this time. Important in this election to register a vote against, it will be useful in the difficult years to come.
So who can we vote for, given Corbyn has all Johnson's faults and quite a few all of his own?
The Liberal Democrats? I'd do that with pleasure, but they're not standing.
We have seen the divisive chaos of a Boris administration. The priority has to be against more of that.
Given your serious concerns about the risks of a Corbyn administration, you should probably looking to vote in such a way to create a minority/coalition government that mitigates those risks.
My thoughts on where to put your X.
1. Worst option Boris Johnson with a majority
2. Second worst option a Jeremy Corbyn majority
3. Best option anything that prevents one and two.
4. So In Scotland SNP
5. In NI anyone who who has the best chance of beating the DUP
6. In England the party who has the best chance of beating the Tories because Corbyn can't win a majority and without one he would no longer be leader
I'm at the stage where I'd be prepared to settle for a very narrow Johnson victory. Something like 1992 or narrower. The kind that will make his life for the next 5 years hell and lead to his eventual thumping in a Labour landslide under an electable moderate leader.
The trouble is, you can't play the GE like this.
And you certainly can't guarantee a moderate Lab leader next time, particularly if it is a narrow victory. Assuming Lab come second
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
Intrigued by that, SeanF. Who do you have in mnd?
I've always had a down on Baldwin, but I find it difficult to think of any single stand out PM who was unequivocally and indisputably much worse than the rest.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
True. And this has been well-noted by Scots, who are about to punish both the Labour and the Conservative & Unionist parties.
Neither will get anywhere near the post of FM until and unless they make a sharp turn:
- Labour would need to veer back towards genuine, caring social democracy, lead by pleasant, likeable personalities;
- the Conservative & Unionists have an even bigger task, uncoupling from the mendacious gang in London, dropping the loony flag-waving act, and rolling their sleeves up and coming up with some thought-through, popular policies on eg. housing, transport and infrastructure.
Both tasks look daunting, and I just cannot see the necessary strong, principled future leader in either party. This is fantastic news for the SLDs in the medium term. Once they ditch the hopeless Swinson and Rennie, they have a golden opportunity to give Unionism the decent, respectable leadership it so desperately needs.
Labour will only have a chance of bouncing back in Scotland after independence IMO.
Same with the Tories.
Unionism seems to be driving certain Scottish social democrats and conservatives quite literally bonkers. Only the process of Scotland becoming a normal country is likely to regain the loonies their sanity.
If the Union survives another decade - a big if - the SLDs will take over the leadership of Unionism for the remainder of the period.
If the Union is dissolved, I expect a powerful bounce for both Labour and Tories. The SNP are not going to have much fun after the initial post-independence GE. And I for one certainly won’t be hanging about to help them.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
.
So who can we vote for, given Corbyn has all Johnson's faults and quite a few all of his own?
The Liberal Democrats? I'd do that with pleasure, but they're not standing.
We have seen the divisive chaos of a Boris administration. The priority has to be against more of that.
Given your serious concerns about the risks of a Corbyn administration, you should probably looking to vote in such a way to create a minority/coalition government that mitigates those risks.
Yes, the priority has to be stopping more of this, but given Corbyn is worse we can't. That option is not on offer. Even as part of a coalition he would be far more divisive and dangerous than Johnson.
That's why I've said the best option is a thumping Tory majority with the Cabinet losing their seats. Problem is, while theoretically possible the chances of it happening are the same as the chances of Colin Graves having a lucid moment.
A 'thumping Tory majority' would be an elective dictatorship and no mistake!
I dont like the idea of anyone with a thumping majority, a y.
Well. I wouldnt say it is illegitimate but it very much is illegitimate in "some way"!
The system shouldnt reward someone with so much power on a clear minority of the votes. We should have some protection in place from a tyrannical PM - not saying Johnson is or will become one but parliament being completely sovereign yet capable of giving huge majorities on 30% of the vote is a valid legitimacy problem.
Its why i support some form of pr. But use if the term dictatorship is just too strong for me because it implies much more than a voting system too easily giving one faction a large majority.
It is more than that, an unwritten uncertain constitution, a media willing to peddle spin and lies, and a party whipping system built on blackmail, intimidation and bribery. An elective dictatorship is what we have if a party gets a 100+ majority.
If we are so uncomfortable with that we should change the system not pretend its all hunky dory by using softer words.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I'm not sure the mini trump stuff will last. There are similarities, but there are also significant differences. I found in interesting that John Oliver, who I personally find hilarious although he can get lazy when talking on british issues and is obsessed with Trump, was keen when stressing how bad Johnson is to his American audience, was keen to note that in some vital ways it is not the case.
He didnt think that made Boris ok, but I think theres a danger of taking a few similarities and overdoing it as a result, which plays into his hands when he is bot trump like. It let's him off the hook, as is often the case when people go over the top.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
The only election that matters for now is on Dec 12th. Imagine how things would have turned out if John Major had lost in 92. We might have been spared Blair.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
And the next generation in 20 years, the sons and daughters of today’s 20 year olds may turn out to be ultra liberal laissez faire capitalists who don’t give a damn about the environment.
Each generation likes to differentiate itself and rebel against the established older one. If the older ones are all Greta fans their kids will see that as something to push against.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
I think we have reached the point of Peak Stuff, and that economic growth will be curtailed by reduced consumerism. It is not just home ownership that is changing. Millenials are less interested in the consumerism of things and favour the consumerism of experiences. No stereo and record collection, it is smartphone and Spotify, no Aga in the kitchen, it is Deliveroo at the door etc etc.
Siobhan Mathers, former policy convener of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, making a right tit of herself on BBC Radio Scotland.
She faltered mid-sentence while saying that Swinson would be the next PM. Classic case of realising you’re talking complete pants, but too late to stop your mouth. Not even the state journalists could hinder their guffaws. Very funny indeed. The Lib Dems really must sit down and think about how they’re going to present this during the next month, because they cannot go on with the current spin. It is a blatant farce.
Interesting that remainers have accused leavers of putting the union in danger and placing leaving the EU above maintaining the Union, but now the same people are espousing the cause of the SNP as part of the 'remain alliance'. Clearly a resounding SNP victory in Scotland is fine if it makes remaining more likely. The hypocrisy is laugh out loud hilarious. It's also grotesquely entitled and patronising - 'in Scotland vote for SNP obviously...' - as if Scots should blithely throw themselves in the path of another independence referendum just so remainers can maintain their white knuckle grip on EU membership.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
on the topic of NI and the DUP in particular, have the Tories (No 10 in particular) burned their bridges irrevocably in the event of a NOM Con win? or will we see another attempt to build a condfidence and supply based on a steady supply if cash and vague promises.
I think another C&S agreement between the Tories and the DUP is very unlikely with the distinct cooling of relations on both sides, certainly for as long as Boris remains PM. The numbers just happened to work almost perfectly last time. It would be surprising if this were to be the case again, but you never know. I would imagine that the Tories, armed with any sort of majority to their name, will make the implementation of the long overdue boundary changes, badly allowed let slip by Cameron, one of their top priorities.
Boundary reform will (or certainly ought to) be the number 2 Tory priority in
A wobbly Remain alliance, indeed. Led by whom, exactly? Not Corbyn. Also not anyone who isn't leader of the Labour party, barring a complete electoral meltdown. And Corbyn isn't going anywhere - why should he? He's still extremely popular among the members, and that's unlikely to change even if he loses 50+ seats.
Led by Corbyn. TINA. Forget anything that Swinson has said about not putting JC into office, that's for the consumption of Tory-LD floating voters and will be .
Well, probably. But that does require Swinson and many of her MPs to have been fast asleep point would be greater than for the tuition fees debacle.
Lib Dems will not support Corbyn or Johnson in coalition or confidence and supply. The membership and defections from both Tory and Lab parliamentary parties will prevent that.
A hung parliament would be headed to new elections in the spring with new Lab and possibly Con leaderships.
Where no deal might be on the table? The LDs would really allow that?
There might be support on certain issues, such as for an A50 extension and referendum, but that is as far as it would go. I cannot see support for a Labour Queens speech or budget for example, unless it was heavily attenuated to the most bland cross party provisions.
So limited confidence and supply to enable a referendum rather than an election in the spring then?
I think the LDs are tying themselves in knots a bit to not piss off the ex labour and ex cons in their ranks when as you've just speculated support is possible, they'd just be cautious about it and extract a big price.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
Sounds like an early draft of Boris's next Manifesto! Should be wildly popular.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
There are two groups of people: those who Boris Johnson has screwed; and those who he has yet to screw. Eventually everyone will migrate from category B to category A.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
Boris has proven to have acted unlawfully. Trump is on the way.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Maybe, though after 14 years, if they win big this time, the threat of another 1997 will not worry them. They'll assume if it happens they can get back in quicker than 13 years this time that's a problem for future them.
Hearing lib dems.have pulled all resource out of two Harrow seats to focus on getting Dorothy elected in Watford. They also really think Sutton and Cheam.in serious play and Mole valley(Paul Beresfords)
Watford is a tall order. They start from a long way behind and it's not an uber-Remain area, even if they have local organisational strength there.
More broadly, they ought to make gains in London and maybe in some of the wealthier areas in Surrey and Sussex where they've managed to hold onto second place. The number of good chances to the North of the capital may be counted on the fingers of one hand.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
If you really consider sending parliament on its holibobs for an extra four days to be an act of greater magnitude than the Iraq war, I really don't know what to say.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
No, but Swinson's comment that he's what you get if you send Trump to Eton was funny partly because there was more than a grain of truth in it.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Maybe, though after 14 years, if they win big this time, the threat of another 1997 will not worry them. They'll assume if it happens they can get back in quicker than 13 years this time that's a problem for future them.
I’m sure that’s their attitude: see @Xtrain’s post. But they would be wrong.
Right now Britain has neither a functioning party of government nor a functioning party of opposition. No wonder it is in speedy decline.
I saw your comment last night (thanks), and the weight of evidence is that you are incorrect.
Although the Auld Alliance was going through a quiet phase at the time of Agincourt, it was hardly void. The weight of evidence is that it is highly likely that individual Scottish knights, and even possibly a modest Scottish unit, fought under French royal command at Agincourt. Certainly, in the aftermath of the defeat, the Scots sent approx 15,000 troops to France to assist their allies, initially very successfully.
So “we” is nonsense. Although not as nonsensical as when Scots say “we” in reference to the Armada, where Scots support for the Spanish is well-documented. Not that the BBC and other diddies care for inconveniences like historical fact.
Didn't the Auld Alliance effectively end with John Knox and the Scottish Reformation?
Yes. Of course. That indeed was the whole point of Knox and his First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women (ahem, Mary Stuart).
Knox was a pawn of huge geopolitical forces far beyond the shores of Scotland.
Interesting that remainers have accused leavers of putting the union in danger and placing leaving the EU above maintaining the Union, but now the same people are espousing the cause of the SNP as part of the 'remain alliance'. Clearly a resounding SNP victory in Scotland is fine if it makes remaining more likely. The hypocrisy is laugh out loud hilarious. It's also grotesquely entitled and patronising - 'in Scotland vote for SNP obviously...' - as if Scots should blithely throw themselves in the path of another independence referendum just so remainers can maintain their white knuckle grip on EU membership.
With or without Brexit, Scotland will be independent shortly. The political divergence is now too huge and too sustained. Pro Union Scots should vote SLD on the remote chance that defeating Brexit keeps the Union on life support a bit longer.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
If you really consider sending parliament on its holibobs for an extra four days to be an act of greater magnitude than the Iraq war, I really don't know what to say.
That is not what was done. So you are, as usual, idiotically wrong.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Things might be better for you, but people are definitely using food banks today. So perhaps you could channel your experience towards compassion and understanding. The variation of wealth today is vast.
I grew up in the Seventies too. We didn't have homeless people sleeping in every city centre doorway then.
In the Eighties and Nineties we did.
Not to the extent that we do in Leicester now.
In London I would say the Nineties were worst but we are back to similar having seemingly solved "street" homelessness in the Noughties.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
Boris has proven to have acted unlawfully. Trump is on the way.
Not all acts of unlawfullness are equal of course. Many governments have lost court cases. The motivation behind Boris's was particularly bad though, even as its actual effect was not.
Here's the Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for the week ending 10th November. Seven polls with fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th November: Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs.
CON 39.00% (+1.12) LAB 27.86% (+1.53) LD 15.86% (-0.14) BXP 8.71% (-1.67) SNP 3.86% (+0.23) GRN 3.29% (+0.04) PC 0.71% (-0.04) Oth 0.71% (-0.54)
CON lead 11.14% (-0.11)
Changes vs. last Sunday
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs a tiny bit. Lab and Con both up.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
There are two groups of people: those who Boris Johnson has screwed; and those who he has yet to screw. Eventually everyone will migrate from category B to category A.
You missed category c - those he is currently screwing.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
EU leaders love him. He has given them everything they wanted. They have seen the rambling incoherence close up, as has Trump, and they know they’re onto a winner.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
I am not Boris greatest fan but you are just projecting your own viscereal hatrid of him
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
Boris has proven to have acted unlawfully. Trump is on the way.
Not all acts of unlawfullness are equal of course. Many governments have lost court cases. The motivation behind Boris's was particularly bad though, even as its actual effect was not.
He should not be PM on that single act. Period. No ifs, no buts.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
Have you not heard there is an election on 12th Dec. Boris asked for it umpteen times!
Boundary reform will (or certainly ought to) be the number 2 Tory priority in
A wobbly Remain alliance, indeed. Led by whom, exactly? Not Corbyn. Also not anyone who isn't leader of the Labour party, barring a complete electoral meltdown. And Corbyn isn't going anywhere - why should he? He's still extremely popular among the members, and that's unlikely to change even if he loses 50+ seats.
Led by Corbyn. TINA. Forget anything that Swinson has said about not putting JC into office, that's for the consumption of Tory-LD floating voters and will be .
Well, probably. But that does require Swinson and many of her MPs to have been fast asleep point would be greater than for the tuition fees debacle.
Lib Dems will not support Corbyn or Johnson in coalition or confidence and supply. The membership and defections from both Tory and Lab parliamentary parties will prevent that.
A hung parliament would be headed to new elections in the spring with new Lab and possibly Con leaderships.
Where no deal might be on the table? The LDs would really allow that?
There might be support on certain issues, such as for an A50 extension and referendum, but that is as far as it would go. I cannot see support for a Labour Queens speech or budget for example, unless it was heavily attenuated to the most bland cross party provisions.
So limited confidence and supply to enable a referendum rather than an election in the spring then?
I think the LDs are tying themselves in knots a bit to not piss off the ex labour and ex cons in their ranks when as you've just speculated support is possible, they'd just be cautious about it and extract a big price.
They’ve said that the would not put Corbyn in No.10, which is quite clear. In the (for now unlikely) event of Labour being the largest party, then I think Corbyn’s head would be required even for confidence and supply.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
These boomers voted for labour plenty in 1997.
Labour needs to wonder why so many crossed the Rubicon.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Things might be better for you, but people are definitely using food banks today. So perhaps you could channel your experience towards compassion and understanding. The variation of wealth today is vast.
I grew up in the Seventies too. We didn't have homeless people sleeping in every city centre doorway then.
In the Eighties and Nineties we did.
Not to the extent that we do in Leicester now.
In London I would say the Nineties were worst but we are back to similar having seemingly solved "street" homelessness in the Noughties.
That thing about correlation and causation...
They always go together in a sentence it seems, so I assume correlation proves causation
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
Have you not heard there is an election on 12th Dec. Boris asked for it umpteen times!
He tried to ram through a mandateless no deal Brexit to a fake deadline by suspending democracy. When that failed, he changed strategy. That does not excuse the malignant assault on the country’s democratic system.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
All the more reason to vocally oppose Boris now.
This is silly. We've had figurehead PMs who didn't do detail before - see Cameron. Far from being a disaster, most people here go misty eyed over that era. Do you think Corbyn would be up till 2am reading his briefs like Thatcher was? At least with Boris we'll get one or two geegaws of national infrastructure out of his time. Others like Gove will provide the intellect, Boris will do what he does best, inspire people and make them feel great, which is every bit as important.
I saw your comment last night (thanks), and the weight of evidence is that you are incorrect.
Although the Auld Alliance was going through a quiet phase at the time of Agincourt, it was hardly void. The weight of evidence is that it is highly likely that individual Scottish knights, and even possibly a modest Scottish unit, fought under French royal command at Agincourt. Certainly, in the aftermath of the defeat, the Scots sent approx 15,000 troops to France to assist their allies, initially very successfully.
So “we” is nonsense. Although not as nonsensical as when Scots say “we” in reference to the Armada, where Scots support for the Spanish is well-documented. Not that the BBC and other diddies care for inconveniences like historical fact.
Although it didn’t end terribly well for the Scots:
David is right on one point though - James I served in France under Henry V and later under Bedford. It was part of his captivity in England from 1406-24. That was very useful for Henry, as it meant any Scottish soldiers he captured could be dragged before their king, convicted of treason and beheaded.
Observe key words “in captivity”.
Folk doing bizarre things in captivity is a well-recorded phenomenon. P.G. Wodehouse springs to mind.
An individual, even a monarch, in captivity, fighting allies and beheading brave countrymen is not the same thing as Scotland, the nation, supporting the twat Henry.
So David’s “we” last night is simply preposterous. Unless he endorses medieval methods of “persuasion”.
Here's the Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for the week ending 10th November. Seven polls with fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th November: Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs.
CON 39.00% (+1.12) LAB 27.86% (+1.53) LD 15.86% (-0.14) BXP 8.71% (-1.67) SNP 3.86% (+0.23) GRN 3.29% (+0.04) PC 0.71% (-0.04) Oth 0.71% (-0.54)
CON lead 11.14% (-0.11)
Changes vs. last Sunday
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs a tiny bit. Lab and Con both up.
Labour and Tories each have a shit start to their campaigns. And the LibDems go down.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
If you really consider sending parliament on its holibobs for an extra four days to be an act of greater magnitude than the Iraq war, I really don't know what to say.
That is not what was done. So you are, as usual, idiotically wrong.
You can couch the prorogation in whatever florid terms you like. The comparison with Iraq still borders on the insane. 500,000 dead say hi.
Boundary reform will (or certainly ought to) be the number 2 Tory priority in
A wobbly Remain alliance, indeed. Led by whom, exactly? Not Corbyn. Also not anyone who isn't leader of the Labour party, barring a complete electoral meltdown. And Corbyn isn't going anywhere - why should he? He's still extremely popular among the members, and that's unlikely to change even if he loses 50+ seats.
Led by Corbyn. TINA. Forget anything that Swinson has said about not putting JC into office, that's for the consumption of Tory-LD floating voters and will be .
Well, probably. But that does require Swinson and many of her MPs to have been fast asleep point would be greater than for the tuition fees debacle.
Lib Dems will not support Corbyn or Johnson in coalition or confidence and supply. The membership and defections from both Tory and Lab parliamentary parties will prevent that.
A hung parliament would be headed to new elections in the spring with new Lab and possibly Con leaderships.
Where no deal might be on the table? The LDs would really allow that?
There might be support on certain issues, such as for an A50 extension and referendum, but that is as far as it would go. I cannot see support for a Labour Queens speech or budget for example, unless it was heavily attenuated to the most bland cross party provisions.
So limited confidence and supply to enable a referendum rather than an election in the spring then?
I think the LDs are tying themselves in knots a bit to not piss off the ex labour and ex cons in their ranks when as you've just speculated support is possible, they'd just be cautious about it and extract a big price.
They’ve said that the would not put Corbyn in No.10, which is quite clear. In the (for now unlikely) event of Labour being the largest party, then I think Corbyn’s head would be required even for confidence and supply.
If Labour are the largest party, the SNP will suffice for Jeremy Corbyn. If the Lib Dems are relevant to forming a majority, Labour will probably have gone backwards in the seat count.
Absolute car crash for Kwarteng on Ridge, but it doesn’t matter. The Tories are untouchable thanks to Jeremy Corbyn and his mates.
Someone said this 1.2 trillion charge against labour is from the vote leave playbook
Make a claim guaranteed to cause outrage, then watch it discussed and argued about planting the original idea in peoples minds.
Makes sense as a theory. All I see is two sides promising oodles of cash for things we couldn't afford 2 years ago apparently, and one promises more than the other
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Things might be better for you, but people are definitely using food banks today. So perhaps you could channel your experience towards compassion and understanding. The variation of wealth today is vast.
I grew up in the Seventies too. We didn't have homeless people sleeping in every city centre doorway then.
In the Eighties and Nineties we did.
Not to the extent that we do in Leicester now.
In London I would say the Nineties were worst but we are back to similar having seemingly solved "street" homelessness in the Noughties.
That thing about correlation and causation...
They always go together in a sentence it seems, so I assume correlation proves causation
The predictive text when I search using 'correlation' would certainly suggest as much!
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
True. And this has been well-noted by Scots, who are about to punish both the Labour and the Conservative & Unionist parties.
Neither will get anywhere near the post of FM until and unless they make a sharp turn:
- Labour would need to veer back towards genuine, caring social democracy, lead by pleasant, likeable personalities;
- the Conservative & Unionists have an even bigger task, uncoupling from the mendacious gang in London, dropping the loony flag-waving act, and rolling their sleeves up and coming up with some thought-through, popular policies on eg. housing, transport and infrastructure.
Both tasks look daunting, and I just cannot see the necessary strong, principled future leader in either party. This is fantastic news for the SLDs in the medium term. Once they ditch the hopeless Swinson and Rennie, they have a golden opportunity to give Unionism the decent, respectable leadership it so desperately needs.
Labour will only have a chance of bouncing back in Scotland after independence IMO.
Same with the Tories.
Unionism seems to be driving certain Scottish social democrats and conservatives quite literally bonkers. Only the process of Scotland becoming a normal country is likely to regain the loonies their sanity.
If the Union survives another decade - a big if - the SLDs will take over the leadership of Unionism for the remainder of the period.
If the Union is dissolved, I expect a powerful bounce for both Labour and Tories. The SNP are not going to have much fun after the initial post-independence GE. And I for one certainly won’t be hanging about to help them.
No ANC style future for the SNP then?
God no!
Non the idiotic Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael nonsense across the water.
True. And this has been well-noted by Scots, who are about to punish both the Labour and the Conservative & Unionist parties.
Neither will get anywhere near the post of FM until and unless they make a sharp turn:
- Labour would need to veer back towards genuine, caring social democracy, lead by pleasant, likeable personalities;
- the Conservative & Unionists have an even bigger task, uncoupling from the mendacious gang in London, dropping the loony flag-waving act, and rolling their sleeves up and coming up with some thought-through, popular policies on eg. housing, transport and infrastructure.
Both tasks look daunting, and I just cannot see the necessary strong, principled future leader in either party. This is fantastic news for the SLDs in the medium term. Once they ditch the hopeless Swinson and Rennie, they have a golden opportunity to give Unionism the decent, respectable leadership it so desperately needs.
Labour will only have a chance of bouncing back in Scotland after independence IMO.
Same with the Tories.
Unionism seems to be driving certain Scottish social democrats and conservatives quite literally bonkers. Only the process of Scotland becoming a normal country is likely to regain the loonies their sanity.
If the Union survives another decade - a big if - the SLDs will take over the leadership of Unionism for the remainder of the period.
If the Union is dissolved, I expect a powerful bounce for both Labour and Tories. The SNP are not going to have much fun after the initial post-independence GE. And I for one certainly won’t be hanging about to help them.
I do not want the UK to break-up, but that’s because I’m English and on the left! I envy the choice that the Scots have. I can see Labour staying Labour post-independence, but what would the Tories call themselves? Conservatives without the Unionist bit?
I’m hoping for a re-alignment of the centre-right post-independence. I would love it if centre-right activists and supporters from the SNP, Lib Dems and Tories pooled resources and built a new, powerful party to lead the country, or at least keep social democrats under scrutiny.
(What the new party call ourselves is a detail, albeit an interesting one.)
Boundary reform will (or certainly ought to) be the number 2 Tory priority in
A wobbly Remain alliance, indeed. Led by whom, exactly? Not Corbyn. Also not anyone who isn't leader of the Labour party, barring a complete electoral meltdown. And Corbyn isn't going anywhere - why should he? He's still extremely popular among the members, and that's unlikely to change even if he loses 50+ seats.
Led by Corbyn. TINA. Forget anything that Swinson has said about not putting JC into office, that's for the consumption of Tory-LD floating voters and will be .
Well, probably. But that does require Swinson and many of her MPs to have been fast asleep point would be greater than for the tuition fees debacle.
Lib Dems will not support Corbyn or Johnson in coalition or confidence and supply. The membership and defections from both Tory and Lab parliamentary parties will prevent that.
A hung parliament would be headed to new elections in the spring with new Lab and possibly Con leaderships.
Where no deal might be on the table? The LDs would really allow that?
There might be support on certain issues, such as for an A50 extension and referendum, but that is as far as it would go. I cannot see support for a Labour Queens speech or budget for example, unless it was heavily attenuated to the most bland cross party provisions.
So limited confidence and supply to enable a referendum rather than an election in the spring then?
I think the LDs are tying themselves in knots a bit to not piss off the ex labour and ex cons in their ranks when as you've just speculated support is possible, they'd just be cautious about it and extract a big price.
They’ve said that the would not put Corbyn in No.10, which is quite clear. In the (for now unlikely) event of Labour being the largest party, then I think Corbyn’s head would be required even for confidence and supply.
If Labour are the largest party, the SNP will suffice for Jeremy Corbyn. If the Lib Dems are relevant to forming a majority, Labour will probably have gone backwards in the seat count.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
I want to believe this, but it just isn't going to happen, at least not under FPTP. You vote once for a minority party, then once you see how far behind the party is in your constituency, you end up voting for one of the top two, or possibly the third party, ever after.
10 years ago, the greens might have gained 10-15% if there had been any kind of PR, but in 2010 they go just 1 voice out of 650 in parliament. In the 80s many of the new voters hoped the Alliance would "break the mould" but got around 20-30 MPs. This time around, the LDs will still have less MPs than the SNP, even if they have a fantastic election.
Catch-22 the duopoly benefit from FPTP so it can never change because either one or the other will be the government. It's about the only thing they can agree on so the cosy little stitch up will continue.
It would be less galling if the 2 of weren't delivering up a choice between Bozo and Corbyn. We are heading for a Tory government whose awe-inspiring rallying cry is that we aren't as bad as the other lot.
They say we get the government we deserve. Perhaps they are right.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
If you really consider sending parliament on its holibobs for an extra four days to be an act of greater magnitude than the Iraq war, I really don't know what to say.
That is not what was done. So you are, as usual, idiotically wrong.
You can couch the prorogation in whatever florid terms you like. The comparison with Iraq still borders on the insane. 500,000 dead say hi.
Prorogation is literally suspending the country’s democracy. Literally literally. Not florid, not a metaphor, literally. Normally it is used as a technical mechanism. On this occasion it was used in a failed attempt to transform the country’s politics by undemocratic means.
Ultimately, you either have some form of respect for the constitution or you do not. No one advocating a vote for the Conservatives in this election has any respect for the constitution.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
No issue with this as a general statement. However, if the electorate appear to believe things that you as a political leader judge to be complete bollocks my view is that you should seek to educate not pander.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
All the more reason to vocally oppose Boris now.
This is silly. We've had figurehead PMs who didn't do detail before - see Cameron. Far from being a disaster, most people here go misty eyed over that era. Do you think Corbyn would be up till 2am reading his briefs like Thatcher was? At least with Boris we'll get one or two geegaws of national infrastructure out of his time. Others like Gove will provide the intellect, Boris will do what he does best, inspire people and make them feel great, which is every bit as important.
He will talk crap, make promises he cannot keep, lie, ramp up division and act unlawfully when it suits him politically. All to meet his personal ego and ambition. He may make you feel good, but he will throw you under a bus if you get in his way.
Interesting that remainers have accused leavers of putting the union in danger and placing leaving the EU above maintaining the Union, but now the same people are espousing the cause of the SNP as part of the 'remain alliance'. Clearly a resounding SNP victory in Scotland is fine if it makes remaining more likely. The hypocrisy is laugh out loud hilarious. It's also grotesquely entitled and patronising - 'in Scotland vote for SNP obviously...' - as if Scots should blithely throw themselves in the path of another independence referendum just so remainers can maintain their white knuckle grip on EU membership.
Speaking as someone who is straight neutral in the ol' union/independent debate, I can confirm that it's Brexiters that are picking at the seams, not Remainers. The polling data bears this out, too.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
You don’t have to vote for him, regardless of whether he wins this time. Important in this election to register a vote against, it will be useful in the difficult years to come.
So who can we vote for, given Corbyn has all Johnson's faults and quite a few all of his own?
The Liberal Democrats? I'd do that with pleasure, but they're not standing.
We have seen the divisive chaos of a Boris administration. The priority has to be against more of that.
Given your serious concerns about the risks of a Corbyn administration, you should probably looking to vote in such a way to create a minority/coalition government that mitigates those risks.
Yes, the priority has to be stopping more of this, but given Corbyn is worse we can't. That option is not on offer. Even as part of a coalition he would be far more divisive and dangerous than Johnson.
That's why I've said the best option is a thumping Tory majority with the Cabinet losing their seats. Problem is, while theoretically possible the chances of it happening are the same as the chances of Colin Graves having a lucid moment.
A 'thumping Tory majority' would be an elective dictatorship and no mistake!
I dont like the idea of anyone with a thumping majority, a view I've held from long before the current leaderships came about. At the very least I think it leads to slipping into bad behaviours, and it can be much worse. But I dislike it being termed elective dictatorship as though it's not merely undesirable but illegitimate in some way.
We only ever get "thumping majorities" because of our electoral system. No party ever has the votes for one.
True. And this has been well-noted by Scots, who are about to punish both the Labour and the Conservative & Unionist parties.
Neither will get anywhere near the post of FM until and unless they make a sharp turn:
- Labour would need to veer back towards genuine, caring social democracy, lead by pleasant, likeable personalities;
- the Conservative & Unionists have an even bigger task, uncoupling from the mendacious gang in London, dropping the loony flag-waving act, and rolling their sleeves up and coming up with some thought-through, popular policies on eg. housing, transport and infrastructure.
Both tasks look daunting, and I just cannot see the necessary strong, principled future leader in either party. This is fantastic news for the SLDs in the medium term. Once they ditch the hopeless Swinson and Rennie, they have a golden opportunity to give Unionism the decent, respectable leadership it so desperately needs.
Labour will only have a chance of bouncing back in Scotland after independence IMO.
Same with the Tories.
Unionism seems to be driving certain Scottish social democrats and conservatives quite literally bonkers. Only the process of Scotland becoming a normal country is likely to regain the loonies their sanity.
If the Union survives another decade - a big if - the SLDs will take over the leadership of Unionism for the remainder of the period.
If the Union is dissolved, I expect a powerful bounce for both Labour and Tories. The SNP are not going to have much fun after the initial post-independence GE. And I for one certainly won’t be hanging about to help them.
No ANC style future for the SNP then?
Fuck no. SNP is gone post Independence.
Yepp. The SNP are toast within 5 years of independence. I’ll not only leave the party, I will campaign hard against any former colleagues who put the party name on a ballot paper.
The SNP was created for, and exists for, a purpose. Once that goal is achieved it is utterly redundant.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
You don’t have to vote for him, regardless of whether he wins this time. Important in this election to register a vote against, it will be useful in the difficult years to come.
So who can we vote for, given Corbyn has all Johnson's faults and quite a few all of his own?
The Liberal Democrats? I'd do that with pleasure, but they're not standing.
We have seen the divisive chaos of a Boris administration. The priority has to be against more of that.
Given your serious concerns about the risks of a Corbyn administration, you should probably looking to vote in such a way to create a minority/coalition government that mitigates those risks.
A 'thumping Tory majority' would be an elective dictatorship and no mistake!
I dont like the idea of anyone with a thumping majority, a y.
Well. I wouldnt say it is illegitimate but it very much is illegitimate in "some way"!
The system shouldnt reward someone with so much power on a clear minority of the votes. We should have some protection in place from a tyrannical PM - not saying Johnson is or will become one but parliament being completely sovereign yet capable of giving huge majorities on 30% of the vote is a valid legitimacy problem.
Its why i support some form of pr. But use if the term dictatorship is just too strong for me because it implies much more than a voting system too easily giving one faction a large majority.
Understand the concerns, but we all (well, lots of us, anyway) think that if the suggested electoral boundaries are imposed for the 2025 election then it may well be difficult for anyone else to beat the Conservatives. And that as a result the country will be very, very different.
Great news for Mary 'Houdini' Creagh. Calvert's momentum should have meant one last push shouldve won it. Now there's a good chance of a hold, against the odds, for ultra-remain Creagh in ultra-Brexit Wakefield. Betting opportunity.
I saw your comment last night (thanks), and the weight of evidence is that you are incorrect.
Although the Auld Alliance was going through a quiet phase at the time of Agincourt, it was hardly void. The weight of evidence is that it is highly likely that individual Scottish knights, and even possibly a modest Scottish unit, fought under French royal command at Agincourt. Certainly, in the aftermath of the defeat, the Scots sent approx 15,000 troops to France to assist their allies, initially very successfully.
So “we” is nonsense. Although not as nonsensical as when Scots say “we” in reference to the Armada, where Scots support for the Spanish is well-documented. Not that the BBC and other diddies care for inconveniences like historical fact.
Although it didn’t end terribly well for the Scots:
David is right on one point though - James I served in France under Henry V and later under Bedford. It was part of his captivity in England from 1406-24. That was very useful for Henry, as it meant any Scottish soldiers he captured could be dragged before their king, convicted of treason and beheaded.
Observe key words “in captivity”.
Folk doing bizarre things in captivity is a well-recorded phenomenon. P.G. Wodehouse springs to mind.
An individual, even a monarch, in captivity, fighting allies and beheading brave countrymen is not the same thing as Scotland, the nation, supporting the twat Henry.
So David’s “we” last night is simply preposterous. Unless he endorses medieval methods of “persuasion”.
The slaughter of the Scots seems to have been partly on their own heads: Bedford is also said to have sent a herald to Douglas once both armies had been deployed to ask what terms for battle he required, to which Douglas grimly replied that the Scots would neither give nor receive any quarter....
Grim times: Many of the English panicked in face of the Milanese advance and a Captain Young was afterwards found guilty of cowardice for retreating with the 500 men under his command without orders, considering the battle as lost. Young was hanged, drawn and quartered as punishment for his retreat...
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
All the more reason to vocally oppose Boris now.
This is silly. We've had figurehead PMs who didn't do detail before - see Cameron. Far from being a disaster, most people here go misty eyed over that era. Do you think Corbyn would be up till 2am reading his briefs like Thatcher was? At least with Boris we'll get one or two geegaws of national infrastructure out of his time. Others like Gove will provide the intellect, Boris will do what he does best, inspire people and make them feel great, which is every bit as important.
He will talk crap, make promises he cannot keep, lie, ramp up division and act unlawfully when it suits him politically. All to meet his personal ego and ambition. He make you feel good, but he will throw you under a bus if you get in his way.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
More broadly, I'm not convinced by the "it'll all be different once the old farts die off" narrative. It assumes that people's opinions and priorities become set in stone by the age of 25 and will never change as they themselves get older.
The main generational challenge to the Right isn't the inevitable match of tens of millions of Greta Thunberg clones. It's the failure to enable home ownership. Get the houses built, enough of them and in the right locations to make them affordable for the young, and you solve the problem.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
The only election that matters for now is on Dec 12th. Imagine how things would have turned out if John Major had lost in 92. We might have been spared Blair.
Great comparison. The Clown winning now is just going to reap a far greater storm in the future. Tories ought to pray for a modest beating now to escape a vegetative state in the foreseeable.
This is getting so ridiculous, by 2030 parliament is going consist purely of young hacks who have desperately wanted to be politicians since the age of 7 and self-police their social media with their life goal in mind, and confused old people who couldn't work out how to turn the facebook on.
Lots of people dislike Johnson (I'm not his biggest fan) but if he does win, lets give him a chance. The country needs to stop stressing about things that haven't happened yet because that is the main cause of the division we have. Same with Brexit, let's see what actually happens.
If it is as bad as some are saying then it is inevitable that a party that has a policy of renewing closer ties with Europe will be elected.
When I grew up in the 70s, I experienced real poverty. We didn't have food banks - we went hungry. The generation before had it even tougher after the war.
Most people experiencing 'poverty' today have Sky, mobiles, the latest trainers. When I was part of a one parent family in the 70s, I wore shoes with elastic bands and we didn't have a TV. When we did get one, you had to put 50p in it to watch it and when that ran out it switched itself off.
Yes, there are lots things that could be better now. But things are miles better now than they have been in even the fairly recent past, and even then I don't recall the whinging and whining that we have to put up with these days.
Doesn't the idea of having a mendacious amoral mini-me Trump as PM repulse you? It does me. For all the inadequacies of previous PMs we have never had one with the faults of Johnson. Whatever else the PM does he or she sets the tone and Johnson would do to us what Trump has done to the US and our reputation internationally will be trashed.
Not as much as the idea of Jeremy Corbyn being PM repulses me. And, we've had worse PM's than Johnson.
As far as I’m aware, no other Prime Minister has tried to suspend democracy to force through a policy that no one voted for that would have caused short term chaos and profound and long lasting effects. Boris Johnson is by some distance the worst Prime Minister Britain has ever had.
We've had PM's who, variously, engaged in insider trading, flagellated young girls, raped maidservants, and started disastrous wars.
As far as I’m aware, none of them sought to dismantle the fabric of the country’s democracy, let alone without a personal mandate or a majority in Parliament.
Oh, I agree with Martin Coxall's/Sean Gabb's view of Johnson. But, he's not a dictator in the making.
All this doom and gloom! I'm actually hopeful for the future. Sure, the next few years will be utter shite, but every year will bring a new crop of young voters, all energised by the likes of Thunberg and XR. They will vote differently to us, and we will see a big change. Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems are all old hat, out of touch and singing the same old tunes. Their days are numbered. They either evolve or die, and I don't see much evidence of evolution in them at the minute.
TBH I'd say Labour is representing that generation, Labours problem ultimately is with those over 45 or more specifically over 60. I'm not saying this should happen but if you take away the over 60's Labour would get an easy majority. It is not the young coming through that is their problem but the older voters. It is a promising sign for Labours future but the boomer generation has a large say still.
You have to appeal to the electorate that is. Not the electorate that you want.
If anything brings about the Revolution, it will be a combination of inertia and Nimbyism.
The Conservatives have pretty much guaranteed another 1997 for themselves through the way they have handled Brexit. They have alienated generations. The only question is when.
Indeed. That video of Johnson rambling and lying incoherently in Northern Ireland is a taster for the future. He cannot deliver what he has promised. And at some point that is going to explode in his face. That’s why I don’t think we’re close to peak anger yet.
All the more reason to vocally oppose Boris now.
This is silly. We've had figurehead PMs who didn't do detail before - see Cameron. Far from being a disaster, most people here go misty eyed over that era. Do you think Corbyn would be up till 2am reading his briefs like Thatcher was? At least with Boris we'll get one or two geegaws of national infrastructure out of his time. Others like Gove will provide the intellect, Boris will do what he does best, inspire people and make them feel great, which is every bit as important.
He will talk crap, make promises he cannot keep, lie, ramp up division and act unlawfully when it suits him politically. All to meet his personal ego and ambition. He make you feel good, but he will throw you under a bus if you get in his way.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
No, so you should give them a majority in Parliament and then it won’t be as chaotic and they won’t be forced to try extraordinary measures to overcome a group of MPs determined to prevent what the people voted for
Absolute car crash for Kwarteng on Ridge, but it doesn’t matter. The Tories are untouchable thanks to Jeremy Corbyn and his mates.
Someone said this 1.2 trillion charge against labour is from the vote leave playbook
Make a claim guaranteed to cause outrage, then watch it discussed and argued about planting the original idea in peoples minds.
Makes sense as a theory. All I see is two sides promising oodles of cash for things we couldn't afford 2 years ago apparently, and one promises more than the other
Well. Look at it like this.
After a period of being strapped for cash, eating beans on toast and watching the pennies to pay the mortgage and the bills things get a bit better. A bit of a pay rise at work and a few expenses have been trimmed.
Just as a treat to reward yourself and your partner for years of careful expenditure you decide to eat out. Loosen the purse strings a bit. Once a month maybe.
You pick a restaurant. Reasonable. Perhaps order the house red wine, pick a rump steak. Perhaps pass on a starter to keep cost down and have a dessert instead. You still have a nice time. Much better than eating beans on toast on a Saturday night. And the bill Isn’t too expensive. You can do it again next month if you’re careful.
That’s the tories’ increase in spending.
Labour on the other hand are going into town, picking the most lavish restaurant you can find. Ordering pre dinner cocktails. All three courses, a couple of Bottles of vintage red. A cheese course, bottle of Port, a nice aged whiskey and then getting a black cab home. A lot more fun. But unsustainable. And stupid.
In a statement, Mr Calvert said: "Over the last 24 hours a number of very historic posts from my personal Facebook timeline have featured in the news media. "While I would prefer to stand and fight the assertions, these comments represent neither my views nor those of the Conservative Party." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50365354
What does it mean that he would have preferred to "fight the assertions"? His own assertions? Or is he trying to deny he posted what he did?
I guess he just wants to reserve the right to post whatever crap he wants to, and evade any future consequences. At least the average IQ of Tory candidates must have leapt when he was given the push!
If there is one question the Leader of the Greens needs to have a good answer for, it is this.
(She should have talked about offsetting).
Quite. Plus how it is justified that she wants to make it harder and prohibitively expensive for people with much less wealth than her to travel for equally valid reasons. Air travel for the elite only, a staple of green politics
"The things I said don't represent what I think". Remarkable how often you hear variations on that theme after some politician is exposed as a bigot or misogynist.
The things I said don't represent what I think. Good god.
I'd be more sympathetic of Lucas, and appreciative that she is not being incredibly rigid about things, if she did not constantly sit in judgement of others.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
No, so you should give them a majority in Parliament and then it won’t be as chaotic and they won’t be forced to try extraordinary measures to overcome a group of MPs determined to prevent what the people voted for
They were given a majority when they last promised stability over chaos. Look what happened. Never again!
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
I’m unimpressed by Corbyn not turning up to the Remembrance Day event last night.
So he doesn’t care. Fine. Turn up, be bored for 2 hours, clap where appropriate and honour the sacrifice made by soldiers of so many countries in the fight for freedom and democracy.
Labour’s report of Tory spending plans is fake news. Tory report of labour’s spending plans is fake news. And such campaigning is awfully close to remains project fear that bombed so spectacularly,
This is one of the worst elections of my lifetime for fake news and ridiculous press coverage.
It's very depressing.
The best approach is to ignore the promises and predictions and judge the parties on what they have done. Do you want more of current administration, the most chaotic in living memory, one not afraid to act unlawfully to force its will?
The racist liar who waves the Union Jack will always beat the racist liar who doesn’t.
You don’t have to vote for him, regardless of whether he wins this time. Important in this election to register a vote against, it will be useful in the difficult years to come.
So who can we vote for, given Corbyn has all Johnson's faults and quite a few all of his own?
The Liberal Democrats? I'd do that with pleasure, but they're not standing.
We have seen the divisive chaos of a Boris administration. The priority has to be against more of that.
Given your s
That's why I've said the best option is a thumping Tory majority with the Cabinet losing their seats. Problem is, while theoretically possible the chances of it happening are the same as the chances of Colin Graves having a lucid moment.
A 'thumping Tory majority' would be an elective dictatorship and no mistake!
I dont like the idea of anyone with a thumping majority, a view I've held from long before the current leaderships came about. At the very least I think it leads to slipping into bad behaviours, and it can be much worse. But I dislike it being termed elective dictatorship as though it's not merely undesirable but illegitimate in some way.
We only ever get "thumping majorities" because of our electoral system. No party ever has the votes for one.
And we can, and I hope will, one day vote for a party which will change that system. But it doesn't make victory under that system dictatorship, just because it is overly powerful. There's more to dictatorship than that.
I saw your comment last night (thanks), and the weight of evidence is that you are incorrect.
Although the Auld Alliance was going through a quiet phase at the time of Agincourt, it was hardly void. The weight of evidence is that it is highly likely that individual Scottish knights, and even possibly a modest Scottish unit, fought under French royal command at Agincourt. Certainly, in the aftermath of the defeat, the Scots sent approx 15,000 troops to France to assist their allies, initially very successfully.
So “we” is nonsense. Although not as nonsensical as when Scots say “we” in reference to the Armada, where Scots support for the Spanish is well-documented. Not that the BBC and other diddies care for inconveniences like historical fact.
Didn't the Auld Alliance effectively end with John Knox and the Scottish Reformation?
Yes. Of course. That indeed was the whole point of Knox and his First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women (ahem, Mary Stuart).
Knox was a pawn of huge geopolitical forces far beyond the shores of Scotland.
I have a good deal of sympathy for Mary. Sixteenth century Scotland was a snakepit. I don't think anybody could have governed successfully.
This is getting so ridiculous, by 2030 parliament is going consist purely of young hacks who have desperately wanted to be politicians since the age of 7 and self-police their social media with their life goal in mind, and confused old people who couldn't work out how to turn the facebook on.
I like his description of the comments as ‘very historic’.
And the oft used formulation of the comments “ not representing my views”.
If these people were more honest, and said I wrote something bloody stupid, which I deeply regret, they might on occasion be forgiven for it.
With or without Brexit, Scotland will be independent shortly. The political divergence is now too huge and too sustained. Pro Union Scots should vote SLD on the remote chance that defeating Brexit keeps the Union on life support a bit longer.
Yes, one would have thought INDSCOT is coming quite soon now. Dragged out of the EU on Hard Brexit terms by a right wing Tory government headed by a vacuous Eton poshboy. Surely a slam dunk. If this does NOT lead to independence I would have to begin to suspect that the Scots are all mouth and no whatevers about the matter.
Comments
Likewise, today, a mobile telephonic device with internet access - "smartphone" - is quite rightly considered an essential tool of modern life. If you are 15 and cannot afford one, it is likely to lead to exclusion and isolation. This is child poverty - where the poverty is poverty not "poverty". The fact that smartphones did not exist in 1979 does not make them merely a "nice to have" in 2019.
Luvverly.
I've always had a down on Baldwin, but I find it difficult to think of any single stand out PM who was unequivocally and indisputably much worse than the rest.
How far are we going back - to Lord North?
If we are so uncomfortable with that we should change the system not pretend its all hunky dory by using softer words.
He didnt think that made Boris ok, but I think theres a danger of taking a few similarities and overdoing it as a result, which plays into his hands when he is bot trump like. It let's him off the hook, as is often the case when people go over the top.
Imagine how things would have turned out if John Major had lost in 92.
We might have been spared Blair.
Each generation likes to differentiate itself and rebel against the established older one. If the older ones are all Greta fans their kids will see that as something to push against.
A new generation of yuppies!!
She faltered mid-sentence while saying that Swinson would be the next PM. Classic case of realising you’re talking complete pants, but too late to stop your mouth. Not even the state journalists could hinder their guffaws. Very funny indeed. The Lib Dems really must sit down and think about how they’re going to present this during the next month, because they cannot go on with the current spin. It is a blatant farce.
I think the LDs are tying themselves in knots a bit to not piss off the ex labour and ex cons in their ranks when as you've just speculated support is possible, they'd just be cautious about it and extract a big price.
From what I saw in his interaction with leaders, especially the EU and Macron in particular, he got on very well with them, as well as Varadkar
He has laid good ground work for trade discussions post brexit and I expect you will continue to be very disaappointed and that Boris might do quite well internationally
He most certainly is not a Trump
There are two groups of people: those who Boris Johnson has screwed; and those who he has yet to screw. Eventually everyone will migrate from category B to category A.
More broadly, they ought to make gains in London and maybe in some of the wealthier areas in Surrey and Sussex where they've managed to hold onto second place. The number of good chances to the North of the capital may be counted on the fingers of one hand.
Right now Britain has neither a functioning party of government nor a functioning party of opposition. No wonder it is in speedy decline.
https://twitter.com/theredroar/status/1193452639272476673?s=21
Knox was a pawn of huge geopolitical forces far beyond the shores of Scotland.
Despite Big G’s idolatory, he is widely seen as a fraudulent joke abroad (read any foreign press).
@ydoethur you suggested that Disraeli may not have been the first minority ethnic PM - who else did you have in mind?
CON 39.00% (+1.12)
LAB 27.86% (+1.53)
LD 15.86% (-0.14)
BXP 8.71% (-1.67)
SNP 3.86% (+0.23)
GRN 3.29% (+0.04)
PC 0.71% (-0.04)
Oth 0.71% (-0.54)
CON lead 11.14% (-0.11)
Changes vs. last Sunday
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs a tiny bit. Lab and Con both up.
Make a claim guaranteed to cause outrage, then watch it discussed and argued about planting the original idea in peoples minds.
Boris asked for it umpteen times!
In the (for now unlikely) event of Labour being the largest party, then I think Corbyn’s head would be required even for confidence and supply.
Labour needs to wonder why so many crossed the Rubicon.
Folk doing bizarre things in captivity is a well-recorded phenomenon. P.G. Wodehouse springs to mind.
An individual, even a monarch, in captivity, fighting allies and beheading brave countrymen is not the same thing as Scotland, the nation, supporting the twat Henry.
So David’s “we” last night is simply preposterous. Unless he endorses medieval methods of “persuasion”.
How is it looking, "Prime Minister" Jo Swinson?
*titter*
Non the idiotic Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael nonsense across the water.
It would be less galling if the 2 of weren't delivering up a choice between Bozo and Corbyn. We are heading for a Tory government whose awe-inspiring rallying cry is that we aren't as bad as the other lot.
They say we get the government we deserve. Perhaps they are right.
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1193475165566504961
Ultimately, you either have some form of respect for the constitution or you do not. No one advocating a vote for the Conservatives in this election has any respect for the constitution.
But they do make Labour look ever so white.
I speak as LibDem voter - a party that has had sign its BAME front benchers on free transfers.
The SNP was created for, and exists for, a purpose. Once that goal is achieved it is utterly redundant.
Greta gorn git her!
Bedford is also said to have sent a herald to Douglas once both armies had been deployed to ask what terms for battle he required, to which Douglas grimly replied that the Scots would neither give nor receive any quarter....
Grim times:
Many of the English panicked in face of the Milanese advance and a Captain Young was afterwards found guilty of cowardice for retreating with the 500 men under his command without orders, considering the battle as lost. Young was hanged, drawn and quartered as punishment for his retreat...
(She should have talked about offsetting).
After a period of being strapped for cash, eating beans on toast and watching the pennies to pay the mortgage and the bills things get a bit better. A bit of a pay rise at work and a few expenses have been trimmed.
Just as a treat to reward yourself and your partner for years of careful expenditure you decide to eat out. Loosen the purse strings a bit. Once a month maybe.
You pick a restaurant. Reasonable. Perhaps order the house red wine, pick a rump steak. Perhaps pass on a starter to keep cost down and have a dessert instead. You still have a nice time. Much better than eating beans on toast on a Saturday night. And the bill
Isn’t too expensive. You can do it again next month if you’re careful.
That’s the tories’ increase in spending.
Labour on the other hand are going into town, picking the most lavish restaurant you can find. Ordering pre dinner cocktails. All three courses, a couple of
Bottles of vintage red. A cheese course, bottle of Port, a nice aged whiskey and then getting a black cab home. A lot more fun. But unsustainable. And stupid.
"While I would prefer to stand and fight the assertions, these comments represent neither my views nor those of the Conservative Party."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50365354
What does it mean that he would have preferred to "fight the assertions"? His own assertions? Or is he trying to deny he posted what he did?
I guess he just wants to reserve the right to post whatever crap he wants to, and evade any future consequences. At least the average IQ of Tory candidates must have leapt when he was given the push!
Remarkable how often you hear variations on that theme after some politician is exposed as a bigot or misogynist.
The things I said don't represent what I think. Good god.
https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656
So he doesn’t care. Fine. Turn up, be bored for 2 hours, clap where appropriate and honour the sacrifice made by soldiers of so many countries in the fight for freedom and democracy.
And the oft used formulation of the comments “ not representing my views”.
If these people were more honest, and said I wrote something bloody stupid, which I deeply regret, they might on occasion be forgiven for it.