On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
I think the contradiction they're facing is that to maximize remainia prospects they essentially need to turn into the pro EU liberal conservative party (A direction Ed Davey hinted at the weekend with his promise to 'moderate' either party) but it would horrify their more left activist base and membership.
Maybe, contrary to expectations, it just turns out that this isn't the ideal opportunity for the LDs that many of us thought it was. Maybe there is too much fear of the 'wrong' outcome for people to feel able to vote for a third party. Maybe the ideal situation for the LDs was actually 2005 - disillusion with the main two parties but little outright terror of them.
That said, a few policies beyond overturning the result of the referendum might have helped.
The problem is that Swinson does not come across as a serious politician or a mature alternative to the other two parties. They have morphed into a single issue protest vote party - a Remain version of UKIP/BXP. So like UKIP/BXP they can do well in elections that aren't taken too seriously like the European elections but look like rank amateurs and wasted votes in the General Election.
Swinson got high off her own supply and believed her own hype about people wanting to Remain. She's no more serious than Nigel Farage will be about as successful as him as a result, just boosted by the legacy appeal of the Lib Dems.
She's never been in charge of a party that won an election, whereas Farage has twice. I doubt she will be anywhere near as succesful as he has been as a Leader
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Boris would block indyref2, Corbyn would enable it in his first term
An indyref2 vote in the next 5 years (with us still in the EU) would probably be lost by the SNP.
An indyref2 after Boris with us outside the EU - I suspect the SNP would walk it.
Not at all, no poll has Yes over 50% in Scotland except with No Deal which Boris has avoided anyway
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
I disagree. The Tories have done very well to frame this election as being a choice between Johnson and Corbyn - which, of course, it is. I don't think there is anything much any LD would have been able to do about that.
She's had little air time. The LDs have indeed been squeezed out. This could change.
Au contraire, the LibDems had a clear window for a week when the main parties were saying nothing but all we heard was how unfair the debates were. No-one is going to vote LibDem because ITV is a big meanie.
Swinson and the leadership generally have not anticipated any of the blindingly obvious events they would face, including this election. Anticipation and preparation can substitute for inexperience but they need to start soon. Swinson got off on the wrong foot with her anti-Corbyn spiel when the only route to a referendum ran through Labour and it has been downhill since.
Re Corporation Tax... I thought all the neolibs on here were telling us that cutting the CT rate would raise the overall tax take.
Boris appears to think the CT rate cut would cost £6bn. Can't someone have a word with him?
Boris has now conceded vast acres of political ground to the Left. This can only be good for Farage. Boris should volunteer to be Corbyn's co-leader and be done with.
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Boris would block indyref2, Corbyn would enable it in his first term
Perfect for the SNP. There's nothing on this earth they would like more than a Tory government suppressing the will of the Scottish people, as they would frame it.
They can scream and scream as much as they want, given the Chinese government is firing rubber bullets at Hong Kong demonstrators today and the Spanish government sent the Civil Guard in to crush any indyref taking place in Catalonia and arrested nationalist leaders, Boris merely banning indyref2 looks moderate by comparison and the SNP can do sod all about it especially as they lost a refenerendum just 5 years ago and are still under 50% in every Scottish poll
Sure, but Johnson won't be PM for ever, and the SNP would hope that the resentment created would push them from 45% in the 2014 IndyRef, and 50% at GE2015, to 60% support for Independence and at the Holyrood elections of 2021.
Then Scottish Independence starts to look like a fait accompli, and it becomes a matter only of timing and conditions. It might not turn out that well for the SNP, but the risk is there.
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Boris would block indyref2, Corbyn would enable it in his first term
Perfect for the SNP. There's nothing on this earth they would like more than a Tory government suppressing the will of the Scottish people, as they would frame it.
Especially when accompanied by a granite hard Brexit and an economic downturn.
Sturgeon wants to rid Scotland of the Tories forever. Getting in a severely restricted Corbyn Gov't that i) Will govern fiscally on the soft left because the Lib Dems won't let them implement all the mad nationalisation ideas and ii) Likely ultimately remains in the EU
Certainly won't achieve that.
The Scottish Tories are still polling around 25%+, still much stronger than a decade ago
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The other interesting conversation I had at the weekend was with someone who voted Labour in Bristol NW last time. They had really gone off Corbyn partly due to Anti Semitism, but they also found it extremely annoying when Corbyn went around as if he had won last time!
I bet if you went to Bristol West rather than North West, you would still find plenty of cheerleaders. That really is West Country Islington.
I notice Charlotte Leslie isn't standing for the Tories there this time.
Yes Bristol West covers Clifton Redland and the City Centre areas. This to me was the quintessential 2017 result. From 5000 labour majority and talk of a four way marginal to 37000 labour majority as Libdem and green vote fell in for labour.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Boris would block indyref2, Corbyn would enable it in his first term
Perfect for the SNP. There's nothing on this earth they would like more than a Tory government suppressing the will of the Scottish people, as they would frame it.
They can scream and scream as much as they want, given the Chinese government is firing rubber bullets at Hong Kong demonstrators today and the Spanish government sent the Civil Guard in to crush any indyref taking place in Catalonia and arrested nationalist leaders, Boris merely banning indyref2 looks moderate by comparison and the SNP can do sod all about it especially as they lost a refenerendum just 5 years ago and are still under 50% in every Scottish poll
Sure, but Johnson won't be PM for ever, and the SNP would hope that the resentment created would push them from 45% in the 2014 IndyRef, and 50% at GE2015, to 60% support for Independence and at the Holyrood elections of 2021.
Then Scottish Independence starts to look like a fait accompli, and it becomes a matter only of timing and conditions. It might not turn out that well for the SNP, but the risk is there.
At the current rate Boris will be PM for a decade, if Sturgeon pushes too far she might even find herself in prison or exile like her Catalan counterparts.
Plus the LDs have increased more in recent polls in Scotland than the SNP
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Are you saying...
...it would be good for Yes?
A lesser oddity of our markedly odd times is that much loved PB meme that Indy/SNP supporters see everything as of benefit to our cause has been turned on its head. I've seen pretty much every possible outcome (BJ majority dystopia, tiny BJ maj chaos, minority Corbyn chaos, no overall maj chaos, hard brexit chaos, no deal chaos etc) described by the very much non-sympatico as of benefit to the SNP. I mean ferchrissake, I haven't seen an 'SNP honeymoon over' for weeks!
I think there isn't really a bad outcome for this election for the SNP - but a majority Brexit implementing Tory Government is strategically superior to a minority Labour administration in the long run.
Off topic: does anyone have a view on the likely affect on the pound if the Tories win a majority? Or is this expectation already "in the price"?
The saying "buy on the rumour, sell on the fact" applies. The stream of good polls for the Tories have been good for GBP (yay!), currently at 1.171 EUR and 1.295 GBP. I expect it to exceed 1.2 EUR and possibly hit $1.35 by election day. If Con wins, I think it will then drop back a bit, particularly as the day after is a Friday. If Lab wins then I don't know: drop a lot?
If we get a Labour-led government, it's not obvious which way sterling would go. There would be the prospect of Corbynesque 'economics' pulling it sharply down, but the prospect of cancelling or softening Brexit pulling it up.
On balance I think the increased short-term uncertainty would cause it to go down but with a lot of volatility.
If Labour win, the financial markets will go bonkers and if McDonnell introduces exchange controls will melt down before we get into 2020. Disaster awaits.
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has sought to reassure the City of London that the Labour party would not impose capital controls if it came to power. ... "I want to make it explicit that we will not introduce capital controls" https://www.ft.com/content/fc5ae454-1f38-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d
Also I find HYUFD's method of argument on this really bizarre. A Corbynista, were Corbyn to become PM, could similarly argue, "Opponents of the Assad regime are tortured and executed, you should be grateful Corbyn is only seizing your pension."
I mean, really, so what? We set our own standards.
At the current rate Boris will be PM for a decade, if Sturgeon pushes too far she might even find herself in prison or exile like her Catalan counterparts.
Plus the LDs have increased more in recent polls in Scotland than the SNP
To a small cabin on Rockall with a monthly airdrop of porridge and lorne sausage.
At the current rate Boris will be PM for a decade, if Sturgeon pushes too far she might even find herself in prison or exile like her Catalan counterparts.
The wizened arthritic claw of Unionism barely concealed by tattered velvet glove.
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Are you saying...
...it would be good for Yes?
A lesser oddity of our markedly odd times is that much loved PB meme that Indy/SNP supporters see everything as of benefit to our cause has been turned on its head. I've seen pretty much every possible outcome (BJ majority dystopia, tiny BJ maj chaos, minority Corbyn chaos, no overall maj chaos, hard brexit chaos, no deal chaos etc) described by the very much non-sympatico as of benefit to the SNP. I mean ferchrissake, I haven't seen an 'SNP honeymoon over' for weeks!
The only outcome that doesn't work for the SNP in the medium-term is one where Johnson loses the election, a second referendum is held, and we vote for Remain. The intellectual justification for IndyRef2 then disappears - as, well, "Nothing Has Changed".
Then, of course, the LibDems were completely wrong to go for a GE.
They should have agreed to VNOC Boris, put Corbyn in as PM, and left him to implement his proposal to renegotiate a deal and put it to a referendum.
The choice always was Brexit or Corbyn.
When it really came down to it, the LibDems preferred Brexit.
A post on here describes Corbyn as the "enabler" of Brexit. And, yes, you can argue that. You can also argue (as you do here) that Swinson is far more so. There was the option to put Corbyn in and stop Brexit. She chose not to. She chose a GE instead, a GE which she knew was very likely to lead to a stronger Tory government and Brexit happening almost immediately.
Personally, I do not buy the charge against either. Parties do what they think brings them more power and influence. No way will that ever not be the case. We are a democracy and must look to the electorate to find those responsible for Brexit. Those who voted Leave in 2016 were the architects, and those who vote Tory on Dec 12th will be the enablers.
That doesn't hold under our electoral system. I meet people on a daily basis who are not Tories but are voting for Johnson because they can't stand the thought of a Corbyn government and our system only gives the choice of one or the other.
The choice the Labour membership have made is herding people into the Tory camp whether you care to admit it or not.
The effective binary - if you wish to frame it this way - is between a Tory majority government and a Labour minority government, the latter being able to cancel Brexit, via Ref2, and very little else, certainly none of the radical lefty stuff. If, in this context, a person votes to achieve the former rather than the latter, then fine, but they should not pretend that they were effectively forced into it by fear of Corbyn turning us into Venezuela.
I won't be cajoled into voting for either but most people see GEs as a simple choice, Labour or Conservative. Our election system has conditioned people to thinking that way and both the ruling duopoly play on it at every single election I can recall.
The pressure on anyone who prefers a different choice, be it Brexit Party, Green of LD is remorseless from the big 2. I can guarantee the key pitch of every Tory canvasser will be about not letting terrorist loving anti-semite Corbyn in and the key pitch of every Labour canvasser will be about not letting the evil Tories in.
They say we get the politicians we deserve. Looking at Corbyn and Bozo it doesn't't say much about us as a country!
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
They feed on grievance.
We can only look on enviously at the serene, non aggrieved, generous-spirited Leavers of olde England.
Also I find HYUFD's method of argument on this really bizarre. A Corbynista, were Corbyn to become PM, could similarly argue, "Opponents of the Assad regime are tortured and executed, you should be grateful Corbyn is only seizing your pension."
I mean, really, so what? We set our own standards.
Boris will have a manifesto commitment to block indyref2, if Corbyn has a manifesto commitment to seize peoples pensions and still wins fair enough
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
I don't think there's any point in voting Tory here, Wes has a 9,000+ majority and the BXP are standing. At least Wes isn't a Corbynista!
OllyT said: "They will try to blame everyone but themselves but they knew it wasn't true last time which is why they had to travel from Foot to Blair in order to ever win another election.
Labour will not win another election until they tack back towards the centre again regardless of where the Corbynistas try to pin the blame this time."
Here`s a trivia question for you: Excluding when Blair was leader, what was the year of the last GE when the Labour Party won a majority?
Extra bonus points if you get it without having to look it up.
The other interesting conversation I had at the weekend was with someone who voted Labour in Bristol NW last time. They had really gone off Corbyn partly due to Anti Semitism, but they also found it extremely annoying when Corbyn went around as if he had won last time!
I bet if you went to Bristol West rather than North West, you would still find plenty of cheerleaders. That really is West Country Islington.
I notice Charlotte Leslie isn't standing for the Tories there this time.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
I was out to lunch yesterday and EVERYONE was in despair at what a miserable choice lies before us. Now we know how Americans must feel.
Off topic: does anyone have a view on the likely affect on the pound if the Tories win a majority? Or is this expectation already "in the price"?
The saying "buy on the rumour, sell on the fact" applies. The stream of good polls for the Tories have been good for GBP (yay!), currently at 1.171 EUR and 1.295 GBP. I expect it to exceed 1.2 EUR and possibly hit $1.35 by election day. If Con wins, I think it will then drop back a bit, particularly as the day after is a Friday. If Lab wins then I don't know: drop a lot?
If we get a Labour-led government, it's not obvious which way sterling would go. There would be the prospect of Corbynesque 'economics' pulling it sharply down, but the prospect of cancelling or softening Brexit pulling it up.
On balance I think the increased short-term uncertainty would cause it to go down but with a lot of volatility.
If Labour win, the financial markets will go bonkers and if McDonnell introduces exchange controls will melt down before we get into 2020. Disaster awaits.
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has sought to reassure the City of London that the Labour party would not impose capital controls if it came to power. ... "I want to make it explicit that we will not introduce capital controls" https://www.ft.com/content/fc5ae454-1f38-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d
He also said railways and water were the limit of nationalization. Now we have the prospect of Commie Cable and the nationalization of 200 ISPs.
I never believe a word McDonnell says, because his whole reason for being in the Labour Party was a lie from the very start.
It will be quite funny if, having facilitated this election, both the SNP and LDs only advance a few feet whilst the Tories walk away with a solid majority.
The SNP would love that, of course.
Are you saying...
...it would be good for Yes?
A lesser oddity of our markedly odd times is that much loved PB meme that Indy/SNP supporters see everything as of benefit to our cause has been turned on its head. I've seen pretty much every possible outcome (BJ majority dystopia, tiny BJ maj chaos, minority Corbyn chaos, no overall maj chaos, hard brexit chaos, no deal chaos etc) described by the very much non-sympatico as of benefit to the SNP. I mean ferchrissake, I haven't seen an 'SNP honeymoon over' for weeks!
The only outcome that doesn't work for the SNP in the medium-term is one where Johnson loses the election, a second referendum is held, and we vote for Remain. The intellectual justification for IndyRef2 then disappears - as, well, "Nothing Has Changed".
It's not looking that likely, though.
Aye, probably the least helpful outcome from an indy pov, though as you say it seems unlikely at the mo'. Given that, Sturgeon should get credit for more-or-less genuinely opposing Brexit for the whole of the UK and supporting a second EU referendum. It pissed off more than a few of her own supporters.
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
I don't think there's any point in voting Tory here, Wes has a 9,000+ majority and the BXP are standing. At least Wes isn't a Corbynista!
Ilford North is effectively safe. For all the troubles Labour is having, its support amongst Asian voters provides a firewall in seats like this.
OllyT said: "They will try to blame everyone but themselves but they knew it wasn't true last time which is why they had to travel from Foot to Blair in order to ever win another election.
Labour will not win another election until they tack back towards the centre again regardless of where the Corbynistas try to pin the blame this time."
Here`s a trivia question for you: Excluding when Blair was leader, what was the year of the last GE when the Labour Party won a majority?
Extra bonus points if you get it without having to look it up.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
A bit unfair to describe him as a sex pest. As far as I know (which isn't first hand or a lot) he indulges in consensual sexual activity rather than forcing his attentions on the unwilling. A fat philanderer, a blubbery nymphomaniac, a corpulent copulater would all be better descriptions.
Why would anybody believe a fucking word Boris says? He is just as likely to reverse his CT reversal after the election as he is to honour it.
Why would anyone believe any politicians pre election promises, be it David Cameron’s no ifs, no buts guarantee to reduce immigration, Nick Clegg’s pledge to scrap tuition fees, Heidi, Chuka, Soubry etc pledging to respect the referendum result etc etc?
They all promise to do things we want, then don’t do them, and don’t mention they are going to do things we don’t want, then do them (Blair and mass EU immigration for one)
OllyT said: "They will try to blame everyone but themselves but they knew it wasn't true last time which is why they had to travel from Foot to Blair in order to ever win another election.
Labour will not win another election until they tack back towards the centre again regardless of where the Corbynistas try to pin the blame this time."
Here`s a trivia question for you: Excluding when Blair was leader, what was the year of the last GE when the Labour Party won a majority?
Extra bonus points if you get it without having to look it up.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
A bit unfair to describe him as a sex pest. As far as I know (which isn't first hand or a lot) he indulges in consensual sexual activity rather than forcing his attentions on the unwilling. A fat philanderer, a blubbery nymphomaniac, a corpulent copulater would all be better descriptions.
Off topic: does anyone have a view on the likely affect on the pound if the Tories win a majority? Or is this expectation already "in the price"?
The saying "buy on the rumour, sell on the fact" applies. The stream of good polls for the Tories have been good for GBP (yay!), currently at 1.171 EUR and 1.295 GBP. I expect it to exceed 1.2 EUR and possibly hit $1.35 by election day. If Con wins, I think it will then drop back a bit, particularly as the day after is a Friday. If Lab wins then I don't know: drop a lot?
If we get a Labour-led government, it's not obvious which way sterling would go. There would be the prospect of Corbynesque 'economics' pulling it sharply down, but the prospect of cancelling or softening Brexit pulling it up.
On balance I think the increased short-term uncertainty would cause it to go down but with a lot of volatility.
If Labour win, the financial markets will go bonkers and if McDonnell introduces exchange controls will melt down before we get into 2020. Disaster awaits.
Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has sought to reassure the City of London that the Labour party would not impose capital controls if it came to power. ... "I want to make it explicit that we will not introduce capital controls" https://www.ft.com/content/fc5ae454-1f38-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d
Nobody ever wants to introduce capital controls. And everybody that does insists that they won't until the moment they do. Because the act of saying you will increases the reason they might need to.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
A bit unfair to describe him as a sex pest. As far as I know (which isn't first hand or a lot) he indulges in consensual sexual activity rather than forcing his attentions on the unwilling. A fat philanderer, a blubbery nymphomaniac, a corpulent copulater would all be better descriptions.
I can think of a more pithy alliteration than corpulent copulater.
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
I don't think there's any point in voting Tory here, Wes has a 9,000+ majority and the BXP are standing. At least Wes isn't a Corbynista!
Ilford North is effectively safe. For all the troubles Labour is having, its support amongst Asian voters provides a firewall in seats like this.
Ilford North was a Conservative seat as recently as 2010 (to 2015). It is the posh bit with the big houses, public schools and (if it matters) a large Jewish population.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
I was out to lunch yesterday and EVERYONE was in despair at what a miserable choice lies before us. Now we know how Americans must feel.
I was walking down the street and was quite bemused at the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the choice that awaits us
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
I was at a dinner party on Saturday night and EVERYONE was in tears at the thought of the fat sexpest or the tired old Trot being prime minister.
A bit unfair to describe him as a sex pest. As far as I know (which isn't first hand or a lot) he indulges in consensual sexual activity rather than forcing his attentions on the unwilling. A fat philanderer, a blubbery nymphomaniac, a corpulent copulater would all be better descriptions.
Bloated bloviating blue bonker WLTM girl for fun and anti-EU frolics.
"The February 1974 United Kingdom general election was held on the 28th day of that month. The Labour Party led by former Prime Minister Harold Wilson made moderate gains, but was short of an overall majority.This resulted in a hung parliament ... Labour won 301 seats, 17 short of a majority.
Why would anybody believe a fucking word Boris says? He is just as likely to reverse his CT reversal after the election as he is to honour it.
Why would anyone believe any politicians pre election promises, be it David Cameron’s no ifs, no buts guarantee to reduce immigration, Nick Clegg’s pledge to scrap tuition fees, Heidi, Chuka, Soubry etc pledging to respect the referendum result etc etc?
They all promise to do things we want, then don’t do them, and don’t mention they are going to do things we don’t want, then do them (Blair and mass EU immigration for one)
People should make a much sharper distinction between politicians stating what they are trying to achieve ("we will reduce knife crime") as opposed to what they will actually do in the hope of achieving that aim ( "To reduce knife crime we will change the law in the following ways..."). It's much more forgivable to fail in your aim, quite possibly for reasons completely out of your control, than it is to not do something which is in your power to do.
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
I don't think there's any point in voting Tory here, Wes has a 9,000+ majority and the BXP are standing. At least Wes isn't a Corbynista!
Ilford North is effectively safe. For all the troubles Labour is having, its support amongst Asian voters provides a firewall in seats like this.
"The February 1974 United Kingdom general election was held on the 28th day of that month. The Labour Party led by former Prime Minister Harold Wilson made moderate gains, but was short of an overall majority.This resulted in a hung parliament ... Labour won 301 seats, 17 short of a majority.
Why would anyone believe any politicians pre election promises, be it David Cameron’s no ifs, no buts guarantee to reduce immigration, Nick Clegg’s pledge to scrap tuition fees, Heidi, Chuka, Soubry etc pledging to respect the referendum result etc etc?
They all promise to do things we want, then don’t do them, and don’t mention they are going to do things we don’t want, then do them (Blair and mass EU immigration for one)
Sure. But there are degrees of mendacity and Boris Johnson is exceptionally steeped in it. Indeed if there were degrees in mendacity he would, unlike at Oxford, have managed a first.
Dura_Ace said: "I believe Corbo when he says he wants to nationalise the internet."
I believe he wants to - but I don`t think he has any idea of the complexities and costs of doing so.
- What about phone costs when most folk have a combined package? - It terrifies me that broadband would be state-controlled (from a civil liberties perspective )
It is clear the public have had enough of Brexit and want it resolved. "Get Brexit done" is a simple and powerful message.
Unilateral revocation and/or yet more referenda (alongside utter confusion on which side the Labour Party would fall) are proving unsurprisingly unappealing alternatives.
Trouble is, Getting Brexit Done will not get Brexit done because we'd still be negotiating in a transition period, and nor will it solve any of the political and economic problems of many Leave voters.
100% correct, which is why I agree with (I think) Stodge that the wheels will come off a Johnson win pretty darn quickly. By the summer of 2020, when we are forced to extend the transition period, people will realise they've been led down the garden path.
But really, its their fault for not understanding what 'done' means (ie, not done). Everyone on here knows the WA doesn't get Brexit done. It isn't hard to find out. Just people (voters) choose not to, but instead believe a three word lie (they did that back in 2016 so there is certainly precedent).
This all assumes that the new Tory MPs are the "right sort" as viewed by OGH (and others).
Yup, which they won't be. They'll be exceedingly ERGey.
He should have written the headline the other way around: A 14% CON lead would give the ERG the margin to stuff Johnson.
I actually wonder how long the Tories will stick with Boris after he's secured them their majority (assuming he does). Not long is my guess. They won't want some doddery old bumbler erring and umming around the place when a driven, committed, tooth-and-claw ultra is what they crave. Boris is merely a means to an end and will soon be a footnote.
You can not be serious.
Johnson having won the mayoralty twice, the Brexit referendum, an overwhelming majority in the leadership election and the General Election majority that eluded May [if it happens] would be completely secure in his job.
Even if he opts for a transition extension followed by a close deal with the EU and reverts to being the liberal he purported to be when London Mayor? Have you looked at the Tory membership lately?
Yes even if he does that. The idea he would be removed if he opts for an extension and/or a deal is as farcical as the suggestion he'd be unpopular and mortally wounded if Parliament stalled Brexit past Halloween.
He would have enough political capital from having secured a majority and getting us finally out to agree a deal - and if an extension becomes necessary and with no General Election he can easily agree an extension even if its not currently the plan.
The Tory membership are not as extreme as people make out. A third of the membership was absurd enough to think Hunt was a good replacement for May . . . actual Francois-style extremist loons would be a tiny minority of both the membership and MPs and with a healthy majority would be on the sidelines.
My turn: who was the last non Oxford graduate to beat an Oxford graduate at a GE (i.e. became PM after the election)?
Churchill when he beat Attlee in 1951
I think so, yes.
Though Churchill was the more major public school, Harrow to Attlee's Haileybury, which maybe reduced the damage of only being Sandhurst and no university to Attlee's Oxford
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
I think the contradiction they're facing is that to maximize remainia prospects they essentially need to turn into the pro EU liberal conservative party (A direction Ed Davey hinted at the weekend with his promise to 'moderate' either party) but it would horrify their more left activist base and membership.
Maybe, contrary to expectations, it just turns out that this isn't the ideal opportunity for the LDs that many of us thought it was. Maybe there is too much fear of the 'wrong' outcome for people to feel able to vote for a third party. Maybe the ideal situation for the LDs was actually 2005 - disillusion with the main two parties but little outright terror of them.
That said, a few policies beyond overturning the result of the referendum might have helped.
The problem is that Swinson does not come across as a serious politician or a mature alternative to the other two parties. They have morphed into a single issue protest vote party - a Remain version of UKIP/BXP. So like UKIP/BXP they can do well in elections that aren't taken too seriously like the European elections but look like rank amateurs and wasted votes in the General Election.
Swinson got high off her own supply and believed her own hype about people wanting to Remain. She's no more serious than Nigel Farage will be about as successful as him as a result, just boosted by the legacy appeal of the Lib Dems.
She's never been in charge of a party that won an election, whereas Farage has twice. I doubt she will be anywhere near as succesful as he has been as a Leader
Indeed but she has been elected as an MP which Farage has never been and will have multiple MPs elected for her party at a General Election which Farage never achieved either.
Assuming a 50-50 remain/leave split (The original vote was 52-48 but the polling now suggests that is reversed - also we need to discard non GE voting referendum voters etc) for simplicity we now have:
The Tory membership are not as extreme as people make out.
Without having a pop at you personally nor the other Con supporters who grace this board with their presence and the party with their membership, I genuinely don't think that's true. If it helps, the others are also bad, just in different directions.
Why would anybody believe a fucking word Boris says? He is just as likely to reverse his CT reversal after the election as he is to honour it.
Anyone who believes a word any politician says is a fool.
I believe Corbo when he says he wants to nationalise the internet.
I believe most of what Corbyn says, thats the problem!!!!
It is very easy to know what Corbyn thinks he means.
There are a lot of policy areas where he doesn't have to spell it out in words of one syllable, but the meaning is clear. Any points on the Middle East all mean the same, regardless of the words used. The same is true on economics, NHS, or nationalisation. We know his destination, so we know what the meaning of the words are, even if the order of the words is wrong or the choice of words allow the uninitiated to interpret them with lashings of ambiguity.
Why would anyone believe any politicians pre election promises, be it David Cameron’s no ifs, no buts guarantee to reduce immigration, Nick Clegg’s pledge to scrap tuition fees, Heidi, Chuka, Soubry etc pledging to respect the referendum result etc etc?
They all promise to do things we want, then don’t do them, and don’t mention they are going to do things we don’t want, then do them (Blair and mass EU immigration for one)
Sure. But there are degrees of mendacity and Boris Johnson is exceptionally steeped in it. Indeed if there were degrees in mendacity he would, unlike at Oxford, have managed a first.
That's just one of those things people say to stop their jaws seizing up rather than because of their truth content. Blair was a liar through and through (eu immigration, ecclestone, iraq), Johnson just ain't in the same ballpark.
It is clear the public have had enough of Brexit and want it resolved. "Get Brexit done" is a simple and powerful message.
Unilateral revocation and/or yet more referenda (alongside utter confusion on which side the Labour Party would fall) are proving unsurprisingly unappealing alternatives.
Trouble is, Getting Brexit Done will not get Brexit done because we'd still be negotiating in a transition period, and nor will it solve any of the political and economic problems of many Leave voters.
100% correct, which is why I agree with (I think) Stodge that the wheels will come off a Johnson win pretty darn quickly. By the summer of 2020, when we are forced to extend the transition period, people will realise they've been led down the garden path.
But really, its their fault for not understanding what 'done' means (ie, not done). Everyone on here knows the WA doesn't get Brexit done. It isn't hard to find out. Just people (voters) choose not to, but instead believe a three word lie (they did that back in 2016 so there is certainly precedent).
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
I think the contradiction they're facing is that to maximize remainia prospects they essentially need to turn into the pro EU liberal conservative party (A direction Ed Davey hinted at the weekend with his promise to 'moderate' either party) but it would horrify their more left activist base and membership.
Maybe, contrary to expectations, it just turns out that this isn't the ideal opportunity for the LDs that many of us thought it was. Maybe there is too much fear of the 'wrong' outcome for people to feel able to vote for a third party. Maybe the ideal situation for the LDs was actually 2005 - disillusion with the main two parties but little outright terror of them.
That said, a few policies beyond overturning the result of the referendum might have helped.
The problem is that Swinson does not come across as a serious politician or a mature alternative to the other two parties. They have morphed into a single issue protest vote party - a Remain version of UKIP/BXP. So like UKIP/BXP they can do well in elections that aren't taken too seriously like the European elections but look like rank amateurs and wasted votes in the General Election.
Swinson got high off her own supply and believed her own hype about people wanting to Remain. She's no more serious than Nigel Farage will be about as successful as him as a result, just boosted by the legacy appeal of the Lib Dems.
She's never been in charge of a party that won an election, whereas Farage has twice. I doubt she will be anywhere near as succesful as he has been as a Leader
Indeed but she has been elected as an MP which Farage has never been and will have multiple MPs elected for her party at a General Election which Farage never achieved either.
Its not a direct comparison either way.
Well you made the comparison! The ‘legacy appeal’ of a party is something Farage never had, people wishing to damn him wilfully overlook that.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
I disagree. The Tories have done very well to frame this election as being a choice between Johnson and Corbyn - which, of course, it is. I don't think there is anything much any LD would have been able to do about that.
She's had little air time. The LDs have indeed been squeezed out. This could change.
She's had air time every day.
Problem with being a one trick pony is that you ignore the message when you've heard it a thousand times before.
Maybe I've been too preoccupied with the Prince Andrew and Jennifer Acuri stories to notice.
I need to upgrade my sources of information.
To be fair the Prince Andrew story is both newer news and more interesting and entertaining than hearing Swinson say for the 1684th time that we need to Remain in the EU.
The Prince Andrew lines about not sweating, being in Pizza Express and not knowing there's a bar in a nightclub are more entertaining and original lies than hearing a Lib Dem try and pretend that Jo Swinson could be our next Prime Minister for the 153rd time this campaign.
It's an exaggeration, Philip, but not strictly a lie because it could happen. It's not very likely, but it's not impossible. So she isn't a liar, or indeed a charlatan, which is a decent start in any comparison with the current PM.
An exaggeration can only go so far before it becomes a lie.
She's literally calling herself the next Prime Minister. If that's not a lie or the actions of a charlatan then I think you're being rather generous to her in a way you wouldn't to other party leaders.
Prince Andrew is alleged to have used the N-word... in the well-known woodpile expression and after asking in advance for forgiveness for what he was going to say. The source is Rohan Silva, former advisor to David Cameron in Number 10.
Whatever the reasoning behind and possible ramifications of the interview, the conclusion that Andrew is boneheadedly stupid seems inescapable.
Assuming a 50-50 remain/leave split (The original vote was 52-48 but the polling now suggests that is reversed - also we need to discard non GE voting referendum voters etc) for simplicity we now have:
2019
Con 20/80 Lab 82/18 L Dem 86/14
So if Lib Dems get their act together they could start to take some of the Labour polling numbers, where as it appears the Tories are hoovering up all Leave.
I am still very sceptical about the prospect of loads of lifelong Labour voters, who voted Leave, all of a sudden breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory.
On topic: It really is striking how the LibDems are failing to capitalise on what should be an ideal strategic scenario for them. Choosing Jo Swinson was a mistake, and it's really hurting them now.
Yes..was at a dinner party Saturday night and subject got onto the inevitable..she is putting Women off according to the women there. They all laughed at the thought of her becoming PM.
Whereas the thought of Boris or Jeremy in No 10 fills them with glee, yes?
No..they dont like Boris but he will get a supposed resolution to all of this. I was pretty surprised
The problem is that Swinson does not come across as a serious politician or a mature alternative to the other two parties. They have morphed into a single issue protest vote party - a Remain version of UKIP/BXP. So like UKIP/BXP they can do well in elections that aren't taken too seriously like the European elections but look like rank amateurs and wasted votes in the General Election.
Swinson got high off her own supply and believed her own hype about people wanting to Remain. She's no more serious than Nigel Farage will be about as successful as him as a result, just boosted by the legacy appeal of the Lib Dems.
She's never been in charge of a party that won an election, whereas Farage has twice. I doubt she will be anywhere near as succesful as he has been as a Leader
Indeed but she has been elected as an MP which Farage has never been and will have multiple MPs elected for her party at a General Election which Farage never achieved either.
Its not a direct comparison either way.
Well you made the comparison! The ‘legacy appeal’ of a party is something Farage never had, people wishing to damn him wilfully overlook that.
I'm not damning him, he's the most successful single-issue politician we've ever seen and probably one of the most successful the world has ever seen on the subject of single-issue politics. We're not talking about Farage we're talking about the Lib Dems and Swinson.
However I was contrasting him and single-issue politics - and the massive electoral difference he has seen between General Elections and European Elections - with the Lib Dems because it is an apt comparison. That's not to slight Farage but like Swinson he was never credibly going to become Prime Minister at this election. He has got a single issue party and she has morphed her party into a single issue party too. Which is not appealing at a General Election.
The Tory membership are not as extreme as people make out.
Without having a pop at you personally nor the other Con supporters who grace this board with their presence and the party with their membership, I genuinely don't think that's true. If it helps, the others are also bad, just in different directions.
In the Conservative party the membership are relatively irrelevant. The danger points are selecting unsuitable extreme candidates as PPC, and that is about it.
If you can control the candidate selection then you hope that none of the headbangers are offered for leadership. There is a good argument to say that safety mechanism is broken, as BJ as leader provides ammunition to destroy the theory. However, at least he isn't Bill Cash / David Davies / Mark Ffs or whatever he is called.
Conference is only good for showboating, drinking and blue rinse threesomes (I think that is what TSE said), rather than dictating policy.
The Tory membership are not as extreme as people make out.
Without having a pop at you personally nor the other Con supporters who grace this board with their presence and the party with their membership, I genuinely don't think that's true. If it helps, the others are also bad, just in different directions.
4% of leavers support the lib dems may sound odd but doorknocking last week i came across excatly two of those specimens. When i asked why they both said they didnt know..it was as though they had been hypnotised.
4% of leavers support the lib dems may sound odd but doorknocking last week i came across excatly two of those specimens. When i asked why they both said they didnt know..it was as though they had been hypnotised.
We have seen this for years. There is a small but hard core of people who want to Leave, but appear to like everything else about the Lib Dems.
Tbf I think HYUFD is genuine in his weirdlly Falangist Unionism, whereas BJ will say any old bollox depending on which audience he's facing.
A large majority of SNP supporters believe that the break up of the union is a price worth paying whether we leave or not, so it doesn't seem very interesting that when faced with a forced choice some leavers make the same one. Gosh.
It's hardly headline stuff that when faced with a forced choice between two things you don't want you choose one of them.
Placed my first bet of the GE - an outside punt on Con to win Gateshead at 16/1. On paper this is a very safe Labour seat with a 17k majority but there is no Brexit party candidate and it is estimated the seat was 58% leave. Electoral Calculus are currently only estimating Labour to win by 300 votes so got to be some value there. Downside is the Con candidate lives in Surrey.
Comments
Swinson and the leadership generally have not anticipated any of the blindingly obvious events they would face, including this election. Anticipation and preparation can substitute for inexperience but they need to start soon. Swinson got off on the wrong foot with her anti-Corbyn spiel when the only route to a referendum ran through Labour and it has been downhill since.
Then Scottish Independence starts to look like a fait accompli, and it becomes a matter only of timing and conditions. It might not turn out that well for the SNP, but the risk is there.
I have been unable to persuade Wor Lass to vote tactically for Labour, as she thinks we've got no chance of beating Philip Davies. So she's sticking with the Green Party.
Plus the LDs have increased more in recent polls in Scotland than the SNP
...
"I want to make it explicit that we will not introduce capital controls"
https://www.ft.com/content/fc5ae454-1f38-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d
I mean, really, so what? We set our own standards.
It's not looking that likely, though.
Personally, I do not buy the charge against either. Parties do what they think brings them more power and influence. No way will that ever not be the case. We are a democracy and must look to the electorate to find those responsible for Brexit. Those who voted Leave in 2016 were the architects, and those who vote Tory on Dec 12th will be the enablers.
The pressure on anyone who prefers a different choice, be it Brexit Party, Green of LD is remorseless from the big 2. I can guarantee the key pitch of every Tory canvasser will be about not letting terrorist loving anti-semite Corbyn in and the key pitch of every Labour canvasser will be about not letting the evil Tories in.
They say we get the politicians we deserve. Looking at Corbyn and Bozo it doesn't't say much about us as a country!
Labour will not win another election until they tack back towards the centre again regardless of where the Corbynistas try to pin the blame this time."
Here`s a trivia question for you: Excluding when Blair was leader, what was the year of the last GE when the Labour Party won a majority?
Extra bonus points if you get it without having to look it up.
I never believe a word McDonnell says, because his whole reason for being in the Labour Party was a lie from the very start.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1196329693609447424?s=20
Ilford North is effectively safe. For all the troubles Labour is having, its support amongst Asian voters provides a firewall in seats like this.
They all promise to do things we want, then don’t do them, and don’t mention they are going to do things we don’t want, then do them (Blair and mass EU immigration for one)
I don`t think LP won a majority then (just most seats) - you`ve got to go back earlier
Sunil will doubtless be voting for Boris to reverse the Beeching cuts.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/15/conservatives-reopen-railway-lines-closed-1960s-beeching-cuts/
"A bit unfair to describe him as a sex pest."
I tend to agree - it also annoyed me when people used say "Boris lied to the queen". At least they`ve stopped that now (I think).
Not according to Wiki:
"The February 1974 United Kingdom general election was held on the 28th day of that month. The Labour Party led by former Prime Minister Harold Wilson made moderate gains, but was short of an overall majority.This resulted in a hung parliament ... Labour won 301 seats, 17 short of a majority.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50382791
Though yes Ilford North is now 109th in the Tory target list so if Boris won it he would have a landslide to match Blair's in 1997 or 2001
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
I believe he wants to - but I don`t think he has any idea of the complexities and costs of doing so.
- What about phone costs when most folk have a combined package?
- It terrifies me that broadband would be state-controlled (from a civil liberties perspective )
He would have enough political capital from having secured a majority and getting us finally out to agree a deal - and if an extension becomes necessary and with no General Election he can easily agree an extension even if its not currently the plan.
The Tory membership are not as extreme as people make out. A third of the membership was absurd enough to think Hunt was a good replacement for May . . . actual Francois-style extremist loons would be a tiny minority of both the membership and MPs and with a healthy majority would be on the sidelines.
Its not a direct comparison either way.
2016 Remain/leave https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted
Con 39/61
Lab 65/35
L Dem 68/32
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/brexit/the-eu/ge2017-was-there-a-brexit-effect/
2017
Con 29/71
Lab 71/29
Assuming a 50-50 remain/leave split (The original vote was 52-48 but the polling now suggests that is reversed - also we need to discard non GE voting referendum voters etc) for simplicity we now have:
2019
Con 20/80
Lab 82/18
L Dem 86/14
There are a lot of policy areas where he doesn't have to spell it out in words of one syllable, but the meaning is clear. Any points on the Middle East all mean the same, regardless of the words used. The same is true on economics, NHS, or nationalisation. We know his destination, so we know what the meaning of the words are, even if the order of the words is wrong or the choice of words allow the uninitiated to interpret them with lashings of ambiguity.
If the point is that there is a hard trade-off to be made here then, I agree.
Trade isn’t simple. This is about facilitating consumer choice from a broader pallet of options worldwide.
We will need to judge the dividing lines on each sector and product as we go and negotiate accordingly.
She's literally calling herself the next Prime Minister. If that's not a lie or the actions of a charlatan then I think you're being rather generous to her in a way you wouldn't to other party leaders.
Watch this 2 minute video and tell me she's not a charlatan: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-50243151/lib-dem-leader-jo-swinson-on-pm-election-fantasy
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1196400109891792899?s=20
Tbf I think HYUFD is genuine in his weirdlly Falangist Unionism, whereas BJ will say any old bollox depending on which audience he's facing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai8JE0lyyJU
Whatever the reasoning behind and possible ramifications of the interview, the conclusion that Andrew is boneheadedly stupid seems inescapable.
https://twitter.com/MrTCHarris/status/1196419763326590976
I am still very sceptical about the prospect of loads of lifelong Labour voters, who voted Leave, all of a sudden breaking the habit of a lifetime and voting Tory.
However I was contrasting him and single-issue politics - and the massive electoral difference he has seen between General Elections and European Elections - with the Lib Dems because it is an apt comparison. That's not to slight Farage but like Swinson he was never credibly going to become Prime Minister at this election. He has got a single issue party and she has morphed her party into a single issue party too. Which is not appealing at a General Election.
Unless we go 15% clear on someone else
If you can control the candidate selection then you hope that none of the headbangers are offered for leadership. There is a good argument to say that safety mechanism is broken, as BJ as leader provides ammunition to destroy the theory. However, at least he isn't Bill Cash / David Davies / Mark Ffs or whatever he is called.
Conference is only good for showboating, drinking and blue rinse threesomes (I think that is what TSE said), rather than dictating policy.
Major and Churchill were the ones who won elections though.
https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1196407049795584003?s=20
It's hardly headline stuff that when faced with a forced choice between two things you don't want you choose one of them.
Note this is the Guardian, not the Express!
https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1196422338524389376