I never understand the requirement for more teachers. Surely there is one per classroom and the assistance comes from teaching assistants. Obviously if there are increasing population numbers then schools will be required to be built and teachers recruited,
Obviously other public services are not the same, more police, doctors, nurses etc can be deployed more readily where required.
I've only watched extracts. How people can find one person more "trustworthy" and "in touch" than another and yet still find the other person more "likeable" makes me wonder what characteristics they want in a person that outweigh trustworthiness and being in touch. But then I have never been keen on extraverts.
I think people interpret likeable as “would I like a drink with them in the pub”
I don’t trust Boris and think he is out of touch. But a drink with his is always good fun..
I've only watched extracts. How people can find one person more "trustworthy" and "in touch" than another and yet still find the other person more "likeable" makes me wonder what characteristics they want in a person that outweigh trustworthiness and being in touch. But then I have never been keen on extraverts.
I think people interpret likeable as “would I like a drink with them in the pub”
I don’t trust Boris and think he is out of touch. But a drink with his is always good fun..
But then there's that moment at 3am, when you're in a dimly lit bar talking to someone you've never met before about something you know nothing about, and your head is starting to ache... And you think to yourself, what the *uck am I doing here?
The Tory Fact-check thing merely confirms the contempt the party has for the electorate and its willingness to deceive. Given the polling leads I genuinely don’t get why they are doing it. The trouble this kind of thing stores up for further down the line really isn’t worth the bother. It’s the same with ruling out an extension to the transition. They don’t need to do it. They’re up against Jeremy Corbyn, for God’s sake!!
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
The 'ei' dipthong in Germanic languages is always (I can't think of any counter examples of the top of my Kopf) properly pronounced aɪ not iː
Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
Pretty scuzzy trick though. I hope it backfires on the mendacious chimps who did it.
This is a good example of how daft the outrage bus has become
I’m not suggesting that you had any racist intent. But if you were a politician and there was anyone of African descent involved you would be accused of racism because you called them “chimps”
I think it’s a salvage than language is so cauterised like this
It was auto correct from chumps! Not spotted in edit timeframe.
The Tory Fact-check thing merely confirms the contempt the party has for the electorate and its willingness to deceive. Given the polling leads I genuinely don’t get why they are doing it. The trouble this kind of thing stores up for further down the line really isn’t worth the bother. It’s the same with ruling out an extension to the transition. They don’t need to do it. They’re up against Jeremy Corbyn, for God’s sake!!
I wonder whether it was Boris's idea.
My impression of Bozo is that he relies almost entirely on advisers for actual ideas.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
The Tory Fact-check thing merely confirms the contempt the party has for the electorate and its willingness to deceive. Given the polling leads I genuinely don’t get why they are doing it. The trouble this kind of thing stores up for further down the line really isn’t worth the bother. It’s the same with ruling out an extension to the transition. They don’t need to do it. They’re up against Jeremy Corbyn, for God’s sake!!
I wonder whether it was Boris's idea.
My impression of Bozo is that he relies almost entirely on advisers for actual ideas.
Yes, he is a lazy airhead too idle for prepared thought.
He is going gangbusters in the race for the worst Prime Minister in history. Brexit is a crap idea, but at least someone like Jeremy Hunt would have had a decent plan. The next five years are going to be far more destructive and humiliating for the country than they needed to be.
I've only watched extracts. How people can find one person more "trustworthy" and "in touch" than another and yet still find the other person more "likeable" makes me wonder what characteristics they want in a person that outweigh trustworthiness and being in touch. But then I have never been keen on extraverts.
I think people interpret likeable as “would I like a drink with them in the pub”
I don’t trust Boris and think he is out of touch. But a drink with his is always good fun..
But then there's that moment at 3am, when you're in a dimly lit bar talking to someone you've never met before about something you know nothing about, and your head is starting to ache... And you think to yourself, what the *uck am I doing here?
Then you realise you are in LA instead of freezing your b*llocks off in a delayed plane at Heathrow and order another a drink
Impersonation is a breach of Twitters rules that can lead to suspension.
Unless there is a FactCheck UK that they impersonated, I don't think they were in breach of any rules.
Pretty scuzzy trick though. I hope it backfires on the mendacious chimps who did it.
This is a good example of how daft the outrage bus has become
I’m not suggesting that you had any racist intent. But if you were a politician and there was anyone of African descent involved you would be accused of racism because you called them “chimps”
I think it’s a salvage than language is so cauterised like this
It was auto correct from chumps! Not spotted in edit timeframe.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
You wouldn't be whining about if Labour had done it./.. and don't tell me Labour are above such things.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
Why did Corbyn pronounce Ep-styne, “Ep-shteen”? Was it to emphasise his Semitic provenance?
If you'd actually listened to how he pronounced it, you'd know that what he said was "Ep-shtyne".
That's how a large proportion of English-speaking people pronounce the final syllable in names such as "Einstein" and "Rubinstein" too. Nothing anti-Jewish about it whatsoever.
I was once told by a native German that the pronunciation of the "s" as "s" or "sh" depends upon where you live in Germany and it very much marks you out like a Geordie or Cumbrian accent would here in England.
I think in the 20s and 30s Einstein was very much pronounced Einshtein and the Einstein pronunciation developed with his fame.
Any name ending in Stein is seen as Jewish - whether or not it is. Presumably in the 20s and 30s people with such names were predominately Jews fleeing from Europe.
I suspect Jeremy was being precise - perhaps he feared being picked up on the Stein pronunciation. It is astonishing that anyone cares about someone's religion. I was taught by two Jewish teachers at school and none of us ever noticed even though their name was in fact clearly Jewish. No one would have cared if we had known - they were excellent teachers.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
The Tories are now averaging about 43%, pretty much the same percentage as they received in 2017.
That's right. Since the pollsters started adjusting their methodology following the Brexit Party partial stand-down, the Con mean figure has been almost exactly equal to Theresa May's 42.4% from 2017.
There's bound to be some voter churn, but the question is how much? I wouldn't be wholly surprised if the bulk of the difference between the 2017 result and the current polling numbers (except, possibly, in Scotland where more than one Union is a hot topic) consists of Labour's hard Remainers and hard Leavers peeling off to other parties, whilst the Tory vote simply stays static.
Whether this is actually down to Brexit, the product of non-core voters giving their verdict on Jeremy Corbyn, or some combination of the two will be a matter for the academics to try to work out after this is all over.
Re: debate “winners and losers”. It shouldn’t really need pointing out, but the whole discussion doesn’t really work because this is not a two horse election race. Whether they ultimately make a difference or not, at least in America the debates (and subsequent polling) reflect the effective binary choice on offer to voters. People may not actually cast their vote based on what they see in the debates, but the polling at least tells us something - the result of the election if they did.
In the U.K. it means very little. Neither main party is going to get 50% of the vote so what does it matter if 50% of people think they “won” the debates? There are so many other factors - candidates in constituency and perceived chances of victory, strength of dislike of one or other candidate leading to tactical voting, fact that we are not electing a PM rather a House of Commons of a particular political makeup etc etc the list is endless. And increasingly on both sides a partisan belief that everyone is lying and will pursue policies and outcomes which they claim they will not, so it doesn’t really matter what they say in debates anyway.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Even as somebody who rarely has anything good to say about Jezza, I am not sure I can get worked up about a single pronunciation of a name.
Indeed. The only thing it suggested to me was that he actually watches very little TV news (if so he would know the generally accepted pronounciation), but probably gets his information from the written media. And handouts from his people.
I still think ITV were at fault for asking about Prince Andrew in the first place. It had no relelevance to how the two would govern the country (unless Corbyn had a Strangelove-style reflex action and blurted out "Abolish the Queen!"). But they couldn't help themselves.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
Charles, you’re so silly. Brilliant stuff.
I keep things in perspective
It was a cheeky thing to do. Trolling slightly, and having a bit of juvenile fun.
It was clearly CCHQ - anyone who claims they were deceived clearly believe what they read in the web without checking sources.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
Since Jeffrey Epstein's preferred pronunciation was "Ep-steen" (as I learnt a few hours ago), presumably the pronunciation "Ep-styne" should be considered dodgy too, given that "yne" for "ein" is just as foreign a pronuncation as "sh" for "s".
Since that observation can't be fitted in a tweet, it will probably get little traction though.
The 'ei' dipthong in Germanic languages is always (I can't think of any counter examples of the top of my Kopf) properly pronounced aɪ not iː
It's why Leipzig isn't pronounced Leapzig.
.
Except sometimes where the ei combination is the result of a compound, when the vowels are pronounced independently.
Morning all and last night just convinced me that the final score on 12th December is likely to be close to Tory 40%, Labour 25%, Liberal 15%, Brexit and Green 5% and SNP, PC etc the rest. Brexit gets done and we move ahead to negotiating a trade deal. Interesting that Michel Barnier apparently liked a tweet critical of Jeremy Corbyn.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
It is the miserable choice before us that is sickening. Even given the batch of politicians available to us in the current parliament, both major parties have actively chosen to thrust forward those with the lesser talent, poorest character and worst judgement.
Interesting that Michel Barnier apparently liked a tweet critical of Jeremy Corbyn.
It is. At the same time I wish he hadn't done it. Controversial foreign politicians taking positions in British domestic politics has not ended well for anyone recently.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
Charles, you’re so silly. Brilliant stuff.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
It is the miserable choice before us that is sickening. Even given the batch of politicians available to us in the current parliament, both major parties have actively chosen to thrust forward those with the lesser talent, poorest character and worst judgement.
It is possible to reject the false choice presented to us last night. I certainly will.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
It is the miserable choice before us that is sickening. Even given the batch of politicians available to us in the current parliament, both major parties have actively chosen to thrust forward those with the lesser talent, poorest character and worst judgement.
It is possible to reject the false choice presented to us last night. I certainly will.
Unless the Oedipus Rexes have stood down in your constituency, of course.
Morning all and last night just convinced me that the final score on 12th December is likely to be close to Tory 40%, Labour 25%, Liberal 15%, Brexit and Green 5% and SNP, PC etc the rest. Brexit gets done and we move ahead to negotiating a trade deal. Interesting that Michel Barnier apparently liked a tweet critical of Jeremy Corbyn.
I'd say Tory and Labour scores up a couple, LibDems down a couple, Brexit effectively squashed like a bug.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
It is the miserable choice before us that is sickening. Even given the batch of politicians available to us in the current parliament, both major parties have actively chosen to thrust forward those with the lesser talent, poorest character and worst judgement.
It is possible to reject the false choice presented to us last night. I certainly will.
So will I. But it is clear that much of the electorate sees it as the same old forced choice.
Also don’t underestimate the impact of our losing from parliament a batch of experienced, moderate and sensible politicians from both main parties - those standing down, forced out, or who will likely lose as Indys - including some with that vital streak of independence of thought, with both major parties replacing them with yet more identikit fanatics.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
I'm sure you'll feel better once you have some breakfast.
Tbh I'd have thought Styne sounds more Jewish than Steen but what do I know? Until pb tonight I'd not considered Epstein's religion. Given what we now know of his activities, I do not suppose he gave it much thought himself.
Even as somebody who rarely has anything good to say about Jezza, I am not sure I can get worked up about a single pronunciation of a name.
Indeed. The only thing it suggested to me was that he actually watches very little TV news (if so he would know the generally accepted pronounciation), but probably gets his information from the written media. And handouts from his people.
I still think ITV were at fault for asking about Prince Andrew in the first place. It had no relelevance to how the two would govern the country (unless Corbyn had a Strangelove-style reflex action and blurted out "Abolish the Queen!"). But they couldn't help themselves.
So true. The Queen's prime minister is hardly in a position where he can criticise the royal family.
Our economy was apparently hardly worth talking about. Boris wants a strong one, apparently, to help the NHS. Corbyn isn't bothered so long as it produces the money he wants to spend on our behalf. Corbyn totally missed the argument that Brexit might have a negative effect on our economy, presumably because it would upset his truly ridiculous fence sitting.
Both parties seem determined to spend lots more of our money but Corbyn will never be outbid on spending. Whether that helps him when Boris's own plans stretch credulity to the limits is unclear.
Boris wants to spend lots of money on infrastructure, including HS2. Corbyn is more concerned about social care and housing.
The handshake/Christmas present nonsense was cringeworthy, quite an achievement given the rest of it. Both seem to agree if we ever hear from Prince Andrew again it will be too soon.
But the big point is surely that Boris will deliver an "oven ready" Brexit in early course. Corbyn will renegotiate then have a referendum giving us another year of agony and hasn't decided whether he will support his re-negotiation or not. I think that when the dust settles that will do little for Corbyn's rating.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
You wouldn't be whining about if Labour had done it./.. and don't tell me Labour are above such things.
We seem to have collectively given up on expecting any sort of standard of honesty.
I remember in the early Blair years when the political agenda was dominated for a few days by outrage at the dishonesty of Blair using a three-year cumulative figure when talking about an increase in NHS spending, but now people barely bat an eyelid to that sort of thing.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I didn’t realise Ashcroft does his polling through YouGov? But a poll I did a few days ago has all the same questions as the one of his reported on ConHome here
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
I’d be hard pressed to say the debate will definitely do anything.
I think it could prompt a little movement but I don’t think it will have a long term effect for anyone.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
Charles, you’re so silly. Brilliant stuff.
I keep things in perspective
It was a cheeky thing to do. Trolling slightly, and having a bit of juvenile fun.
It was clearly CCHQ - anyone who claims they were deceived clearly believe what they read in the web without checking sources.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
Why you spend your credibility defending this stuff is beyond me. In an era of social media fakery and politicians like Trump shitting all over the truth it is not where the Conservative party should be.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
The changes Labour proposes will principally affect the political declaration, which is not legally binding, and move the direction of travel for the final deal towards closer alignment which is what the EU wants. The EU will always be happy to renegotiate the deal if it is in a direction that they like - that after all is why they were happy to renegotiate the deal with Johnson, since the revised arrangements for NI were more or less what the EU had proposed in the first place.
I don't know if I am considered "sensible" but I hope this explanation will be deemed sufficient.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
The only purpose of the "Labour" in "a Labour Deal" is to justify voting against everything now in favour of arguing that only a Labour government can sort this out. It's cynical and dishonest.
The EU may decide to play along, as they did to an extent with May and Johnson, in the interests of trying to get this finished and not interfere in domestic politics too much.
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
I don't think that we will see any movement. Which is good news for the Tories of course.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
Inclined to agree.At the very least it would make Boris and his acolytes explain their deal.
And doing so would probably produce a landslide for Remain.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
What % of the population knows what "CCHQ" stands for? Probably <5 I would guess. It's clearly an effort at deception, but hardly unexpected from a team of cynical liars.</p>
Before you start smearing others, just look at the Labour team.. Seamus Milne, Corbyn, McDonnell. It makes me feel sick just thinking about them.
I'm sure you'll feel better once you have some breakfast.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
They said that about Boris. If Corbyn is elected with a mandate to negotiate a deal, they will negotiate. I doubt it will be hugely different, but then again it really doesn’t have to be.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
The one challenge missing from last night - and the main reason the LibDems should have been there - was that, far from “sorting” Brexit, Bozo’s deal means another year of Brexit filled news, another year of uncertainty over our future position, and another political crisis as the choice between extending the transition or leaving with no deal starts to loom again.
Corbyn couldn’t make it because it would force him either to reveal for Remain or admit that Labour proposes the same, fronted by another referendum.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
The changes Labour proposes will principally affect the political declaration, which is not legally binding, and move the direction of travel for the final deal towards closer alignment which is what the EU wants. The EU will always be happy to renegotiate the deal if it is in a direction that they like - that after all is why they were happy to renegotiate the deal with Johnson, since the revised arrangements for NI were more or less what the EU had proposed in the first place.
I don't know if I am considered "sensible" but I hope this explanation will be deemed sufficient.
Well in that case why bother with the renegotiation and not just go straight to a referendum? Given that Labour (in power) could just repudiate the political declaration and pursuing of its objectives unilaterally.
Why did Corbyn pronounce Ep-styne, “Ep-shteen”? Was it to emphasise his Semitic provenance?
If you'd actually listened to how he pronounced it, you'd know that what he said was "Ep-shtyne".
That's how a large proportion of English-speaking people pronounce the final syllable in names such as "Einstein" and "Rubinstein" too. Nothing anti-Jewish about it whatsoever.
I was once told by a native German that the pronunciation of the "s" as "s" or "sh" depends upon where you live in Germany and it very much marks you out like a Geordie or Cumbrian accent would here in England.
I think in the 20s and 30s Einstein was very much pronounced Einshtein and the Einstein pronunciation developed with his fame.
Any name ending in Stein is seen as Jewish - whether or not it is. Presumably in the 20s and 30s people with such names were predominately Jews fleeing from Europe.
I suspect Jeremy was being precise - perhaps he feared being picked up on the Stein pronunciation. It is astonishing that anyone cares about someone's religion. I was taught by two Jewish teachers at school and none of us ever noticed even though their name was in fact clearly Jewish. No one would have cared if we had known - they were excellent teachers.
As others have said, Epstein in Germany would be pronounced 'epshtine', but in Hamburg many would say 'epstine'.
It don't know Jeffery Epstein's preferred pronounciation of his name is with "-ein" or "-een", but with Harvey Weistein it is pronoinced 'Wine-steen" with an English 'w'. Interesting is that the first ei stays as an I sound but the second has become an ee.
I think it is aceptable for names to be changed through generations, when your family migrates to another country. The weirdes example of German to American name change was a baseball player called Bumgardener which must have come from Baumgartner which means "tree gardener" as in a nurseryman.
I also do not think that we should criticise people for mispronuncing a name, as long as they do not intend to offend when doing so.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
Charles, you’re so silly. Brilliant stuff.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
But we still don’t have an answer to the key question: do androids dream of electric sheep?
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
Your view does not match that of the majority (albeit an even slimmer majority than the Referendum result!)
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
He probably was. Because he is.
So it should give Labour supporters pause that Corbyn was seen as even more useless.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
It’s hard to remember that Blade Runner originally presented from an 80s perspective a downbeat vision of the future rather the wildly optimistic and uplifting piece it appears to be from today’s point of view.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
But we still don’t have an answer to the key question: do androids dream of electric sheep?
That is the central question of the book and is left unanswered, though we get the hint that the answer is yes.
I note that Labour leaders almost always beat Tory ones on this hands down.
I think it just means "not posh" or perhaps in some way "normal", but there's something paternalistic about it too, so not wholly positive.
I think it reflects the question from the ?care worker? who said you've both lived comfortable lives, why would either of you understand poverty? Johnson waffled, Corbyn said part of his job was to listen to people. I don't think there's any reasonable doubt that Corbyn is more familiar with the challenges of low incomes than Johnson. Whether that matters is of course something for voters to decide.
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
Definitely? How can you say with such certainty for something that was not seen by a massive audience and was deemed a draw by the public? It would be a strange reason for polls to move
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
That’s not really true though, is it? The whole argument about May’s deal was that the “customs union backstop” would be temporary because it was liked by neither side (the EU thought it was very generous (economically) to the U.K, but those opposed in the U.K. didn’t like the fact that it tied us in to EU rules (and in fact EU negotiated external trade agreements) indefinitely. We’re the EU lying about that?
I’m sure also that “sensible” heads in the EU would recognise that a referendum that excludes options acceptable to the vast bulk of the leave supporting vote is hardly a basis for moving forward (whether within or without the EU)
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
Because it is a win win. Either close linkage of the UK to SM standards and CU, or we Remain. Such a Lab Deal would suit both UK and EU very well.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
What they wouldn’t like is Corbyn’s coalition losing a landslide 2 years later and the Tories renegotiating a new exit deal. It’s just wasting years for this country. Business does not want more delay and another referendum.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
That’s not really true though, is it? The whole argument about May’s deal was that the “customs union backstop” would be temporary because it was liked by neither side (the EU thought it was very generous (economically) to the U.K, but those opposed in the U.K. didn’t like the fact that it tied us in to EU rules (and in fact EU negotiated external trade agreements) indefinitely. We’re the EU lying about that?
What is true is that the EU would cooperate with a path that led to remain. I am sure they would be able to summon up the necessary politics to join up the dots, their politicians being shoulders above ours in maturity and intelligence.
I don't think there's any reasonable doubt that Corbyn is more familiar with the challenges of low incomes than Johnson.
What makes you say that? Even when he had nearly spent himself into bankruptcy through incompetence and complacency Corbyn was still far better off than the majority of the population. Due to his background, he’s never been out of work. He’s never had to choose between eating and heating, as some of us have.
He may *think* he understands. But I’m doubtful he does.
As for listening, sure, he listens so carefully he split his own party in half by ignoring their views. Doesn’t fill me with confidence he will listen to ordinary people.
That doesn’t mean of course that Johnson understands either. I agree with the care worker. They are both out of touch and out for their mates.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
But we still don’t have an answer to the key question: do androids dream of electric sheep?
That is the central question of the book and is left unanswered, though we get the hint that the answer is yes.
Androids may not dream of electric sheep, but Robots tweet of Brexit dreams.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
What they wouldn’t like is Corbyn’s coalition losing a landslide 2 years later and the Tories renegotiating a new exit deal. It’s just wasting years for this country. Business does not want more delay and another referendum.
No, business does not want a risk of a no deal exit. Everything else flows from that.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
They included CCHQ clearly in the bio
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
Charles, you’re so silly. Brilliant stuff.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
No. EpSTEEN.
EPsteen, much more likely.
Just to complicate things, isn't Harvey Weinstein usually pronounced as Winesteen? (I could well be wrong (pronounced rong))
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
What they wouldn’t like is Corbyn’s coalition losing a landslide 2 years later and the Tories renegotiating a new exit deal. It’s just wasting years for this country. Business does not want more delay and another referendum.
Jo Swinson’s reception at the CBI on Monday demonstrates that business wants to stay in the EU.
So, there's a video clip about him at a Tea Party event talking about how the US is going in the wrong direction under Obama. And yet nobody seems to care. (Indeed, I've seen Dems defending it on the basis that it shows he knows how to reach out to Republicans.) Some candidates seem to get away with things in their past, others cannot.
Now, you can make the case that he's only running well in Iowa, and to a lesser extent New Hampshire. But if he wins both Primaries, then he will certainly have "the big mo".
Becareful that poll is 72% college educated. Far too high even for a Dem Primary
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
But we still don’t have an answer to the key question: do androids dream of electric sheep?
That is the central question of the book and is left unanswered, though we get the hint that the answer is yes.
Androids may not dream of electric sheep, but Robots tweet of Brexit dreams.
And Human League sing together in electric dreams.
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
I don't think that we will see any movement. Which is good news for the Tories of course.
Well I'm off door knocking today in a Tory/LD marginal.. The last week there has been really good support for the Tories..surprisingly so in fact. It has felt like the pre fox hunting and manifesto launch days in 2017. We noticed an immediate change after those two issues came out..let's see if last night has put people off Boris. My gut feel is that it will have.
I don't think there's any reasonable doubt that Corbyn is more familiar with the challenges of low incomes than Johnson.
What makes you say that? Even when he had nearly spent himself into bankruptcy through incompetence and complacency Corbyn was still far better off than the majority of the population. Due to his background, he’s never been out of work. He’s never had to choose between eating and heating, as some of us have.
He may *think* he understands. But I’m doubtful he does.
As for listening, sure, he listens so carefully he split his own party in half by ignoring their views. Doesn’t fill me with confidence he will listen to ordinary people.
That doesn’t mean of course that Johnson understands either. I agree with the care worker. They are both out of touch and out for their mates.
It’s an attempt to deceive, but entirely to be expected from a party led by a man who is incapable of telling the truth. The problem for the Tories is that while they’ll win the election with ease thanks to who they’re up against, in the end the lies catch up with you.
An attempt to deceive would have been had they done it from a new account. In reality, all the tweets were made from an account called "CCHQPress".
It is against Twitter rules for blue check marked accounts to change their display name to something that does not identify who they are.
The debate last night will definitely take a few points off the Tories in the polls..whether it will lead to a sustained rise for labour who knows. Boris was in my view useless
He probably was. Because he is.
So it should give Labour supporters pause that Corbyn was seen as even more useless.
He wasnt in my eyes and I tried to look at it dispassionately with my family. We scored it independently of each other..all of us scored Boris huge winner in first 20 mins then he lost the plot.
I note that Labour leaders almost always beat Tory ones on this hands down.
I think it just means "not posh" or perhaps in some way "normal", but there's something paternalistic about it too, so not wholly positive.
I think it reflects the question from the ?care worker? who said you've both lived comfortable lives, why would either of you understand poverty? Johnson waffled, Corbyn said part of his job was to listen to people. I don't think there's any reasonable doubt that Corbyn is more familiar with the challenges of low incomes than Johnson. Whether that matters is of course something for voters to decide.
Corbyn for all his faults comes across as having genuine empathy for other people and the issues they face on a daily basis . I think that does matter to people .
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
What they wouldn’t like is Corbyn’s coalition losing a landslide 2 years later and the Tories renegotiating a new exit deal. It’s just wasting years for this country. Business does not want more delay and another referendum.
Jo Swinson’s reception at the CBI on Monday demonstrates that business wants to stay in the EU.
Yes the empty seats and the head of the CBI’s support for the deal shows business really want a Corbyn Swinson government.
BladeRunner was set today. Amazing how Philip K Dick’s visions have endured so well. He captured the banality and emptiness of the future like no other science fiction writer.
Or perhaps the mixture of the weird and the familiar.
Appropriately, I watched a couple of episodes of The Man in the High Castle, rather than the debate. The third season is very good.
What no "sensible" Labour supporter has explained thus far:
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
I don't know what you class as sensible, but I'm very familiar with EU politics. They would be pleased with either outcome if the choice was Remain vs customs union, and have said repeatedly that a customs union and regulatory alignment was on offer and could be concluded very quickly. The case forthe deal would be that it removes us from the political union which some dislike while keeping us in the economic union, and solving the Irish issue at the same time (because no customs border is needed anywhere).
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
What they wouldn’t like is Corbyn’s coalition losing a landslide 2 years later and the Tories renegotiating a new exit deal. It’s just wasting years for this country. Business does not want more delay and another referendum.
Jo Swinson’s reception at the CBI on Monday demonstrates that business wants to stay in the EU.
Yes the empty seats and the head of the CBI’s support for the deal shows business really want a Corbyn Swinson government.
I note that Labour leaders almost always beat Tory ones on this hands down.
I think it just means "not posh" or perhaps in some way "normal", but there's something paternalistic about it too, so not wholly positive.
I think it reflects the question from the ?care worker? who said you've both lived comfortable lives, why would either of you understand poverty? Johnson waffled, Corbyn said part of his job was to listen to people. I don't think there's any reasonable doubt that Corbyn is more familiar with the challenges of low incomes than Johnson. Whether that matters is of course something for voters to decide.
Corbyn for all his faults comes across as having genuine empathy for other people and the issues they face on a daily basis . I think that does matter to people .
He may to you.
He does not to me.
I think with Corbyn half the problem is his supporters or waverers see what they want to see rather than what’s really there.
Comments
Was it symptomatic of a lack of seriousness and a desire for LOLZ, and a willingness to troll? Yes.
People are condemning it for the wrong reason.
I don’t trust Boris and think he is out of touch. But a drink with his is always good fun..
It's why Leipzig isn't pronounced Leapzig.
“Fact checking” is a well accepted term not a brand.
He is going gangbusters in the race for the worst Prime Minister in history. Brexit is a crap idea, but at least someone like Jeremy Hunt would have had a decent plan. The next five years are going to be far more destructive and humiliating for the country than they needed to be.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-Fulz4ytZ54
I note that Labour leaders almost always beat Tory ones on this hands down.
Same old, same old. Should see Pochettino at ManU by Christmas.
I think in the 20s and 30s Einstein was very much pronounced Einshtein and the Einstein pronunciation developed with his fame.
Any name ending in Stein is seen as Jewish - whether or not it is. Presumably in the 20s and 30s people with such names were predominately Jews fleeing from Europe.
I suspect Jeremy was being precise - perhaps he feared being picked up on the Stein pronunciation. It is astonishing that anyone cares about someone's religion. I was taught by two Jewish teachers at school and none of us ever noticed even though their name was in fact clearly Jewish. No one would have cared if we had known - they were excellent teachers.
https://twitter.com/RealMattLucas/status/1196920847975550976?s=19
There's bound to be some voter churn, but the question is how much? I wouldn't be wholly surprised if the bulk of the difference between the 2017 result and the current polling numbers (except, possibly, in Scotland where more than one Union is a hot topic) consists of Labour's hard Remainers and hard Leavers peeling off to other parties, whilst the Tory vote simply stays static.
Whether this is actually down to Brexit, the product of non-core voters giving their verdict on Jeremy Corbyn, or some combination of the two will be a matter for the academics to try to work out after this is all over.
In the U.K. it means very little. Neither main party is going to get 50% of the vote so what does it matter if 50% of people think they “won” the debates? There are so many other factors - candidates in constituency and perceived chances of victory, strength of dislike of one or other candidate leading to tactical voting, fact that we are not electing a PM rather a House of Commons of a particular political makeup etc etc the list is endless. And increasingly on both sides a partisan belief that everyone is lying and will pursue policies and outcomes which they claim they will not, so it doesn’t really matter what they say in debates anyway.
I still think ITV were at fault for asking about Prince Andrew in the first place. It had no relelevance to how the two would govern the country (unless Corbyn had a Strangelove-style reflex action and blurted out "Abolish the Queen!"). But they couldn't help themselves.
*very small print on page 6 of 10 - “produced by local Liberal Democrat’s”.
It was a cheeky thing to do. Trolling slightly, and having a bit of juvenile fun.
It was clearly CCHQ - anyone who claims they were deceived clearly believe what they read in the web without checking sources.
But either way it’s really not worth getting worked up about. Ephemera.
Except sometimes where the ei combination is the result of a compound, when the vowels are pronounced independently.
deinstallieren, for example
Or geimpft
(Thinks: as a door-knocker, does that make me a Minion?
BANANA!!!!)
They’re about generating headlines and soundbites for wider social and MSM dissemination.
If they want to win, that’s precisely what they need to do.
Also don’t underestimate the impact of our losing from parliament a batch of experienced, moderate and sensible politicians from both main parties - those standing down, forced out, or who will likely lose as Indys - including some with that vital streak of independence of thought, with both major parties replacing them with yet more identikit fanatics.
So, was it any good from a PB perspective? Did you bingo calls come in?
Our economy was apparently hardly worth talking about. Boris wants a strong one, apparently, to help the NHS. Corbyn isn't bothered so long as it produces the money he wants to spend on our behalf. Corbyn totally missed the argument that Brexit might have a negative effect on our economy, presumably because it would upset his truly ridiculous fence sitting.
Both parties seem determined to spend lots more of our money but Corbyn will never be outbid on spending. Whether that helps him when Boris's own plans stretch credulity to the limits is unclear.
Boris wants to spend lots of money on infrastructure, including HS2. Corbyn is more concerned about social care and housing.
The handshake/Christmas present nonsense was cringeworthy, quite an achievement given the rest of it. Both seem to agree if we ever hear from Prince Andrew again it will be too soon.
But the big point is surely that Boris will deliver an "oven ready" Brexit in early course. Corbyn will renegotiate then have a referendum giving us another year of agony and hasn't decided whether he will support his re-negotiation or not. I think that when the dust settles that will do little for Corbyn's rating.
I remember in the early Blair years when the political agenda was dominated for a few days by outrage at the dishonesty of Blair using a three-year cumulative figure when talking about an increase in NHS spending, but now people barely bat an eyelid to that sort of thing.
Why on earth would the EU27 renegotiate a Brexit deal with a Corbyn government in 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years knowing that the majority of the cabinet has already stated their intention to campaign for remain i.e. against the new deal in any subsequent referendum. It simply makes no sense and I certainly cannot see President Macron sanctioning it. More likely the EU would insist either a Corbyn government ratifies Boris' deal or puts it up against remain as the options in a second referendum.
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/11/lord-ashcroft-have-you-made-up-your-mind-yet-will-you-put-up-with-johnson-to-get-brexit-week-two-of-my-general-election-dashboard.html
Boris was in my view useless
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-50457262
I think it could prompt a little movement but I don’t think it will have a long term effect for anyone.
I don't know if I am considered "sensible" but I hope this explanation will be deemed sufficient.
The EU may decide to play along, as they did to an extent with May and Johnson, in the interests of trying to get this finished and not interfere in domestic politics too much.
And doing so would probably produce a landslide for Remain.
Corbyn couldn’t make it because it would force him either to reveal for Remain or admit that Labour proposes the same, fronted by another referendum.
It don't know Jeffery Epstein's preferred pronounciation of his name is with "-ein" or "-een", but with Harvey Weistein it is pronoinced 'Wine-steen" with an English 'w'. Interesting is that the first ei stays as an I sound but the second has become an ee.
I think it is aceptable for names to be changed through generations, when your family migrates to another country. The weirdes example of German to American name change was a baseball player called Bumgardener which must have come from Baumgartner which means "tree gardener" as in a nurseryman.
I also do not think that we should criticise people for mispronuncing a name, as long as they do not intend to offend when doing so.
Brexiters don't like either alternative (because they say alignment means "vassal state") but the EU would certainly prefer either to Boris's deal, which will simply prolong the agony with years of trade haggling.
So it should give Labour supporters pause that Corbyn was seen as even more useless.
I’m sure also that “sensible” heads in the EU would recognise that a referendum that excludes options acceptable to the vast bulk of the leave supporting vote is hardly a basis for moving forward (whether within or without the EU)
He may *think* he understands. But I’m doubtful he does.
As for listening, sure, he listens so carefully he split his own party in half by ignoring their views. Doesn’t fill me with confidence he will listen to ordinary people.
That doesn’t mean of course that Johnson understands either. I agree with the care worker. They are both out of touch and out for their mates.
Robots tweet of Brexit dreams.
https://twitter.com/catmachine/status/1197048458751959041?s=20
The last week there has been really good support for the Tories..surprisingly so in fact. It has felt like the pre fox hunting and manifesto launch days in 2017.
We noticed an immediate change after those two issues came out..let's see if last night has put people off Boris.
My gut feel is that it will have.
We scored it independently of each other..all of us scored Boris huge winner in first 20 mins then he lost the plot.
Appropriately, I watched a couple of episodes of The Man in the High Castle, rather than the debate.
The third season is very good.
He does not to me.
I think with Corbyn half the problem is his supporters or waverers see what they want to see rather than what’s really there.