Interesting that Sky News have just had a segment on the Muslim vote . I brought this up a few days ago , it’s crucial in some key marginals in the Midlands and parts of the north .
Muslims also oppose abortion
But their loyalty to Labour is greater
Even if it only shifts a few away from Labour that is bad news for them in northern and Midlands marginal seats.
Islam opposes abortion except in the case of saving the life of the mother, certainly late term abortions as Labour wants now
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
A few possible popcorn moments there but will anyone miss Chuka?
Imagine if all of those came to pass. Nobody try a drinking game. The hangover would last for days.
Labour need to urgently clarify their abortion policy if they wish anyone remotely religious (or with a soul) to vote for them. https://righttolife.org.uk/news/labour-pledge-to-introduce-abortion-for-any-reason-up-to-birth/ These things are traditionally matters of conscience for MPs, and public opinion is that late abortions should be more restricted - rather than on-demand at 39 weeks.
ummm the LibDem policy is also to decriminalise abortion (haven't checked other parties yet). Most Conservative MPs chose not to vote against decriminalising abortion in Northern Ireland. So which party should anyone "with a soul vote" for these days?
So ther eis Surely, there is a difference between the decriminalising abortion in NI - and removing the time limit of 23 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in line with the Abortion Act 1967?
I don't think so. The Abortion Act 1967 never applied to Northern Ireland. Labour policy would bring England and Wales into line with the situation in Northern Ireland since October this year.
So there is now literally an abortion free-for-all in Northern Ireland, with no time limit? Any woman can turn up in Belfast and ask for a termination at eight and a half months? Just because, say, she doesn't like the sex of her baby?
But dont even think about hurting those foxes!
Killing foxes - evil beyond recognition.
Killing human babies in the womb - yeah, that’s okay, right up to 40 weeks.
So their policy is probably much the same as Canada's has been for decades
LibDems picked up 2/3 of the UKIP racist and fruit-cake vote!
I know this area and there was an extremely energetic and personable LibDem candidate which could explain the swing. Regarding the UKIP comment, the previous UKIP candidate, who was defeated by the Conservative at the previous election, was the sister of Diane James, who was head of UKIP for about 10 days and is generally regarded as one of the saner leaders (I know that is comparative) She was a very hardworking councillor and on the ball (I say that as someone who can't stand UKIP). The previous Conservative candidate defected to the Brexit Party and was chose as Parliamentary candidate for Sunderland Central - hence the by-election.
We are approaching the point at which the LibDems’ best hope is that Labour does so badly that the ensuing fallout sets them up as opposition waiting for the election after next.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
That would make an excellent 'Firewall' market, with the addition of a couple more between Chuka. and Laura Pidcock.
The Labour Party would decriminalise abortion in Britain, making it legal to have an abortion for any reason up to the birth of a child, a party spokeswoman has confirmed.
The party’s manifesto, launched today ahead of the December 12 general election, says: “We will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions.”
A Labour spokeswoman confirmed to the Catholic Herald that this would mean the repeal of the relevant sections of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, which currently bans abortion.
If Labour want to make abortion legal for any reason the woman chooses, right up until she is about to give birth, how strange they didn't put it in their manifesto. How strange too that they seem unaware that the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act was amended by David Steel's Abortion Act 1967. What's more likely is that they want to end the Northern Ireland abortion ban and there was a proofreading error. Have CCHQ been on the phone to the Catholic Herald?
Actually I am out of date and abortion law has been liberalised in NI. So basically Labour want to bring E&W in line with NI. (As for Scotland?)
Positive night for team blue last night, 2 gains and 2 holds
Can someone explain these numbers to me? If Con is plus 7.1 there were on 34.4. If SNP were -0.7, there were on 37.4. That would indicate a Con GAIN not HOLD.
We are approaching the point at which the LibDems’ best hope is that Labour does so badly that the ensuing fallout sets them up as opposition waiting for the election after next.
I imagine much will depend on who both parties choose as their next leader [I can't see Swinson lasting to the next election even if she clings on to her own seat].
One thing we haven't seem to discussed much is who could be Labour leader based on two criteria: 1: Who survives - ie Pidcock is touted but could lose her seat. 2: The percentage of MPs/MEPs threshold requirement for nominations.
There was talk a couple of years ago that if Corbyn left early then a Corbynista might fail to be nominated. But what are the rules now regarding the percentages and would the Corbynista NEC change them?
Have the Corbynistas managed to get enough MPs into safe seats to secure one of their own the leadership?
Labour are promising to "Provide sufficient funding for schools to deliver mandatory LGBT+ inclusive relationships and sex education". I'm all for this, but has anyone told Labour's muslim supporters?
Don't know about George but something I have noticed is that many relatively affluent people tend to be reluctant to admit - or even to allow themselves to discover - that they are much better off than the average joe. The QT exchange was quite useful in demonstrating this common little foible. It has great political significance, I think, since it can and does distort the public perception of taxation and any proposed reforms in that area.
Completely agree. A feature of living in a bubble, keeping up with the Joneses
Positive night for team blue last night, 2 gains and 2 holds
Can someone explain these numbers to me? If Con is plus 7.1 there were on 34.4. If SNP were -0.7, there were on 37.4. That would indicate a Con GAIN not HOLD.
Their explanation - "Taking companies into public ownership is fiscally neutral by international accounting standards when bonds are exchanged for shares (as in previous nationalisations)"
with a footnote - "Depending on timing there may be some further capital expenditure on nationalisations but we would hope HM Treasury’s Public Ownership Unit will have completed their acquisition before then and have not included a fiscal multiplier effect from them"
In other words they'd finance the extra few hundred billion all by an increase in borrowing, and hope the financial markets didn't notice that the borrowing to GDP ratio had gone through the roof. That seems rather, shall we say, optimistic.
It also demonstrates the mendaciousness of Labour claiming that the spending is somehow no greater than "Scandinavia" or Germany - here in Denmark govt spending is about 51% of GDP but debt/GDP is about 40%, interest rates are -0.5% and even the red government is running a surplus on current spending. I've never seen a manifesto as bonkers as Labour's and I remember 1983 -
I even voted for Kinnock in 87 but this is not a serious programme for government it's simply a set of slogans so they can slip into their comfort zone of opposition politics and avoid the hard job of actually being responsible for the economy.
Positive night for team blue last night, 2 gains and 2 holds
Can someone explain these numbers to me? If Con is plus 7.1 there were on 34.4. If SNP were -0.7, there were on 37.4. That would indicate a Con GAIN not HOLD.
What am I getting wrong here?
Those are just first preferences. It is probably also a multi member seat, which can have an effect on these things.
Labour are promising to "Provide sufficient funding for schools to deliver mandatory LGBT+ inclusive relationships and sex education". I'm all for this, but has anyone told Labour's muslim supporters?
You only have to book an Uber in London to find out where some members of that community stands on this issue. I have received at least one lengthy lecture on my way home....
Interesting that Sky News have just had a segment on the Muslim vote . I brought this up a few days ago , it’s crucial in some key marginals in the Midlands and parts of the north .
Muslims also oppose abortion
But their loyalty to Labour is greater
Even if it only shifts a few away from Labour that is bad news for them in northern and Midlands marginal seats.
Islam opposes abortion except in the case of saving the life of the mother, certainly late term abortions as Labour wants now
Rubbish, unless "Islam" in this case happens to be the name of friend of yours with those views.
Interesting that Sky News have just had a segment on the Muslim vote . I brought this up a few days ago , it’s crucial in some key marginals in the Midlands and parts of the north .
Muslims also oppose abortion
But their loyalty to Labour is greater
Even if it only shifts a few away from Labour that is bad news for them in northern and Midlands marginal seats.
Islam opposes abortion except in the case of saving the life of the mother, certainly late term abortions as Labour wants now
Boris Johnson isn’t going to help with the Muslim community . The research showed Muslims voted 64% for Labour, 25% for the Tories .
That was done after the 2015 election . The Muslim vote makes up at least 10% in 83 constituencies.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
I would like to see the back of Mogg, I must admit.
Well Leigh, Redcar and Hemsworth would be remarkable. But if Bolton NE, Alyn and Deeside, Warwick and Leamington, Vale of Clywd are close - well, these are the sorts of seats Con need to be gaining just to offset losses to SNP and LD.
The Labour abortion policy is really on the law because currently abortion is illegal but has exceptions . Any policy change would then have to be debated and voted on in the Commons where limits would be put.
The Labour proposal is just making abortion legal. I think Labour need to clarify what exactly the term limits they would think acceptable .
I would assume they are proposing no changes to term limits. It is just a question of decriminalising the procedure. In Northern Ireland the term limit is 28 weeks but the process has been decriminalised and that is what Labour is proposing for the rest of the UK, not to change the term limits. I wonder what kind of hysterical and inaccurate stories about Labour we can expect tomorrow, spread with gay abandon by PM Tory shills?
Looks like strong defences being mounted in Guildford, Hastings and Rye, Crawley and Milton Keynes North and South. They have many more events than anywhere else.
Labour need to urgently clarify their abortion policy if they wish anyone remotely religious (or with a soul) to vote for them. https://righttolife.org.uk/news/labour-pledge-to-introduce-abortion-for-any-reason-up-to-birth/ These things are traditionally matters of conscience for MPs, and public opinion is that late abortions should be more restricted - rather than on-demand at 39 weeks.
ummm the LibDem policy is also to decriminalise abortion (haven't checked other parties yet). Most Conservative MPs chose not to vote against decriminalising abortion in Northern Ireland. So which party should anyone "with a soul vote" for these days?
So ther eis Surely, there is a difference between the decriminalising abortion in NI - and removing the time limit of 23 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in line with the Abortion Act 1967?
I don't think so. The Abortion Act 1967 never applied to Northern Ireland. Labour policy would bring England and Wales into line with the situation in Northern Ireland since October this year.
So there is now literally an abortion free-for-all in Northern Ireland, with no time limit? Any woman can turn up in Belfast and ask for a termination at eight and a half months? Just because, say, she doesn't like the sex of her baby?
I don't know, you tell me - can they? do they? and who do they ask? and what answer do they get?
These women getting abortions during labour or whatever only exist in your weird imagination.
I am trying to ascertain what the legal situation is in NI. It may be that there are no late-term abortions happening. Hell, they've only just started happening at all. But - is there now no legal upper time limit within part of the UK? I think it a question to which we should have an answer. And if so, politicians should answer whether that should remain.
Personally, I see no reason why abortion law shouldn't be standardised across the whole of the UK.
Abortion is now legal in NI up to 28 weeks. Beyond that the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 1945 kicks in and any abortion would be an offence.
Wonder what it is for Anglicans. I remember my old history teacher calling the CofE the 'tory party at prayer'
Shows how old I am...
Anglican vote was 58% Tory 28% Labour
More hypocrisy , just as we see in the USA . If these so called Christians really cared about the poor they wouldn’t be voting Tory.
I am not voting Tory this time, but none the less your post is arrogant sanctimonious bullshit. Anyone who cares for the poor would not want our country modelled on Venezuela
The issue is surely less about whether or not he’s in the top 5% of earners (he is) but the perception.
The fact is that if you’re on 80k yes you are in the top 5% but you inhabit that top 5% with a lot of people much wealthier than you, obscenely so in some cases. The term “top 5% of earners” does conjure up images of oligarchs and fat cats, but there will be some everyday working families in there too.
FWIW I think it’s all a little bit of a storm in a teacup. As with any tax policy if you’re going to be worse off because of the change you’re going to be angry about it.
He may be in the top 5% of earners, but the 87k or whatever he earns isn't part of the top 5% of *earnings*. And it's a very long way short of being part of the top 5% of *wealth*.
This is why using 'income' as the primary barometer for taxation and wealth redistribution is fundamentally flawed. Even for those who believe in such things.
Interesting that Sky News have just had a segment on the Muslim vote . I brought this up a few days ago , it’s crucial in some key marginals in the Midlands and parts of the north .
Muslims also oppose abortion
But their loyalty to Labour is greater
Do Muslims (in general; I assume there is a range of views) actually oppose abortion being legalised, or are they fine with society allowing it as long as it doesn't impact them?
Interesting that Sky News have just had a segment on the Muslim vote . I brought this up a few days ago , it’s crucial in some key marginals in the Midlands and parts of the north .
Doesn't it vote Labour, en masse and almost unquestioningly?
Johnson has certainly done his best to put them off voting Tory.
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
Positive night for team blue last night, 2 gains and 2 holds
Can someone explain these numbers to me? If Con is plus 7.1 there were on 34.4. If SNP were -0.7, there were on 37.4. That would indicate a Con GAIN not HOLD.
What am I getting wrong here?
Those are just first preferences. It is probably also a multi member seat, which can have an effect on these things.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
And there's only 1 or 2 I would be remotely bothered about!
Looks like strong defences being mounted in Guildford, Hastings and Rye, Crawley and Milton Keynes North and South. They have many more events than anywhere else.
Strong offence in Reading East.
Make of that what you will.
Seems fairly sensible.
Guildford could be interesting with Anne Milton standing as an Independent. I wouldn't like to guess how it will go, but the fact that it is on that list suggests it may be close.
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
This has the potential to make that bloke getting thumped at Canning Town station look like a very warm welcome.
Wonder what it is for Anglicans. I remember my old history teacher calling the CofE the 'tory party at prayer'
Shows how old I am...
Anglican vote was 58% Tory 28% Labour
More hypocrisy , just as we see in the USA . If these so called Christians really cared about the poor they wouldn’t be voting Tory.
Isn’t it possible to live in a world where we all accept that pretty much all politicians care about the poor, but they just have different prescriptions for helping them out. We can disagree over policy without doubting motives. For example, I don’t doubt Labour wants to help the poor, I just doubt its policies will do so in the long run.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
I would like to see the back of Mogg, I must admit.
Could be a reverse incumbency effect there? Cf. Lembit Opik in 2010.
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
Well global warming or not, they’re won’t be a lot of sunshine where some of those megaphones might end up.
Have they forgotten the East End tube incident already?
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
I think many of them would be more likely to give XR some pointers themselves.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
I would like to see the back of Mogg, I must admit.
Could be a reverse incumbency effect there? Cf. Lembit Opik in 2010.
JRM is one of those MPs who is better off the more of his constituents don’t know who is representing them.
You have to feel for voters who troop down the polling station to vote for Cameron or May and end up with a tit like him as their MP.
Labour need to urgently clarify their abortion policy if they wish anyone remotely religious (or with a soul) to vote for them. https://righttolife.org.uk/news/labour-pledge-to-introduce-abortion-for-any-reason-up-to-birth/ These things are traditionally matters of conscience for MPs, and public opinion is that late abortions should be more restricted - rather than on-demand at 39 weeks.
ummm the LibDem policy is also to decriminalise abortion (haven't checked other parties yet). Most Conservative MPs chose not to vote against decriminalising abortion in Northern Ireland. So which party should anyone "with a soul vote" for these days?
So ther eis Surely, there is a difference between the decriminalising abortion in NI - and removing the time limit of 23 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in line with the Abortion Act 1967?
I don't think so. The Abortion Act 1967 never applied to Northern Ireland. Labour policy would bring England and Wales into line with the situation in Northern Ireland since October this year.
So there is now literally an abortion free-for-all in Northern Ireland, with no time limit? Any woman can turn up in Belfast and ask for a termination at eight and a half months? Just because, say, she doesn't like the sex of her baby?
I don't know, you tell me - can they? do they? and who do they ask? and what answer do they get?
These women getting abortions during labour or whatever only exist in your weird imagination.
I am trying to ascertain what the legal situation is in NI. It may be that there are no late-term abortions happening. Hell, they've only just started happening at all. But - is there now no legal upper time limit within part of the UK? I think it a question to which we should have an answer. And if so, politicians should answer whether that should remain.
Personally, I see no reason why abortion law shouldn't be standardised across the whole of the UK.
Abortion is now legal in NI up to 28 weeks. Beyond that the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 1945 kicks in and any abortion would be an offence.
Is that using their estimates for the costs, or actual estimates?
It's using Labour's estimates, including ignoring the hundreds of billions of extra capital/nationalisation expenditure. In other words, it's complete bollocks.
Well Leigh, Redcar and Hemsworth would be remarkable. But if Bolton NE, Alyn and Deeside, Warwick and Leamington, Vale of Clywd are close - well, these are the sorts of seats Con need to be gaining just to offset losses to SNP and LD.
Chesterfield is a surprise. Is it the LibDems mounting another attack on it? Can't be Tories, can it?
Looks like strong defences being mounted in Guildford, Hastings and Rye, Crawley and Milton Keynes North and South. They have many more events than anywhere else.
Strong offence in Reading East.
Make of that what you will.
I think the Tories should hold all those seats, although my model suggests MKN could be close. Reading East looks like an easy Labour hold on my model, but the Reading West poll had the Tories doing much better there than in my model, so perhaps Labour is under performing in the town?
This has to be the darkest GE campaign I've ever witnessed in this country - disseminating the idea that one of the major political parties intends to legalize infanticide. Sadly, people will have looked to the US and concluded that this stuff works so let's emulate.
Given the Roman Catholic’s shameful history towards the Jews I’d have thought the Catholic Herald would be on Team Corbyn.
Well that is a first. Never seen you write a bigoted post before. I suppose some people think it is NOT ok tbe "Islamophobic" or anti-Semitic, but it IS to kick the world's 1.2Billion Roman Catholics
I am assuming he missed out the word "church's".
You do not want to be in the position of trying to defend the Vatican's history towards Jews.
I assume it was an attempt at humour. Still, it's a bit weird to go for the Catholic Church's historical anti-semitism (which has been apologised for), when they are currently proudly and officially homophobic and misogynistic. Also not sure if the Catholic Herald can be blamed for the policies of the Catholic Church.
Don’t forget their role as the world’s largest paedophile exchange network.
Nothing like categorising everyone who belongs to a group as being the same as the worst example in that group, eh! Such a statement does you no credit at all. It is no better than someone describing Islam as the world’s largest terrorist organisation, for instance.
Anyway, the precise wording in the Labour manifesto, having looked it up, on abortion is this: “ We will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions. .
That can be read as meaning that there should be no time limits within which an abortion can happen ie you could get an abortion the day before your due date.
If that is what is intended it is to me quite horrible. An abortion at a very late stage of pregnancy is an induced labour of a viable child.
Perhaps we will get clarification of what this means.
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
Well global warming or not, they’re won’t be a lot of sunshine where some of those megaphones might end up.
Have they forgotten the East End tube incident already?
I mean, I read it as taking alarms with them and setting them off in buildings, not setting off the alarms of buildings.
But also, these are apparently telegram messages, something that is nigh impossible to prove who they come from / go to. This could easily be some people making stuff up and trying to make XR look bad in the wake of Hallam being a complete arsehole.
Labour are promising to "Provide sufficient funding for schools to deliver mandatory LGBT+ inclusive relationships and sex education". I'm all for this, but has anyone told Labour's muslim supporters?
Wonder what it is for Anglicans. I remember my old history teacher calling the CofE the 'tory party at prayer'
Shows how old I am...
Anglican vote was 58% Tory 28% Labour
More hypocrisy , just as we see in the USA . If these so called Christians really cared about the poor they wouldn’t be voting Tory.
Isn’t it possible to live in a world where we all accept that pretty much all politicians care about the poor, but they just have different prescriptions for helping them out. We can disagree over policy without doubting motives. For example, I don’t doubt Labour wants to help the poor, I just doubt its policies will do so in the long run.
Wanting to help the poor and believing that the best way to help the poor is through the iron hand of Big State rather than personal charity is a *massive* ideological leap though.
The 'Jesus was a Socialist' brigade generally don't understand this, despite a complete lack of any scripture pointing to Our Lord favouring big earthly government, and a reasonable amount suggesting that he was, in fact,skeptical towards, and disruptive of it...
Well Leigh, Redcar and Hemsworth would be remarkable. But if Bolton NE, Alyn and Deeside, Warwick and Leamington, Vale of Clywd are close - well, these are the sorts of seats Con need to be gaining just to offset losses to SNP and LD.
Chesterfield is a surprise. Is it the LibDems mounting another attack on it? Can't be Tories, can it?
Might be a 3 way marginal, who knows
I expect Labour will hold it with a reduced majority.
Another activist raised the option of setting off fire alarms in office buildings. He said: "Could setting off fire alarms in certain buildings perhaps be made part of this action? Enter building, eg. a bank or govt office and set off the fire alarm.
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
Well global warming or not, they’re won’t be a lot of sunshine where some of those megaphones might end up.
Have they forgotten the East End tube incident already?
I mean, I read it as taking alarms with them and setting them off in buildings, not setting off the alarms of buildings.
But also, these are apparently telegram messages, something that is nigh impossible to prove who they come from / go to. This could easily be some people making stuff up and trying to make XR look bad in the wake of Hallam being a complete arsehole.
Possibly. But XR need to be careful. Essentially they are pushing at an open door given the vast majority welcome things like wind being x% more of our electricity generation than ten years ago or whatever. However, if you decide to push too far too fast you end up not “just blowing the bloody doors off” so to speak but wrecking the whole cause because a lot of people get pissed off.
The tube train was a portent. If they don’t ease off people are likely to get hurt, which isn’t good all ways round obviously.
The Labour Party would decriminalise abortion in Britain, making it legal to have an abortion for any reason up to the birth of a child, a party spokeswoman has confirmed.
The party’s manifesto, launched today ahead of the December 12 general election, says: “We will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions.”
A Labour spokeswoman confirmed to the Catholic Herald that this would mean the repeal of the relevant sections of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, which currently bans abortion.
If Labour want to make abortion legal for any reason the woman chooses, right up until she is about to give birth, how strange they didn't put it in their manifesto. How strange too that they seem unaware that the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act was amended by David Steel's Abortion Act 1967. What's more likely is that they want to end the Northern Ireland abortion ban and there was a proofreading error. Have CCHQ been on the phone to the Catholic Herald?
Incorrect. It is in the manifesto in two places - only in one place does it relate to Northern Ireland. I have quoted the precise wording up thread. In relation to NI, the wording is this: “ Women in Northern Ireland should have access to abortions in Northern Ireland .
I think we’ll see by the weekend polls whether Labours manifesto is going to crash and burn .
Personally I think they’ve made a mistake by including too many proposals and the manifesto to use an analogy is like one of those albums which has a few good songs and a load of rubbish fillers .
And I’m saying this as a normal Labour voter , would it stop me from voting Labour, no , because I don’t expect the full manifesto would ever be implemented even if a miracle happened and they got elected .
I do feel the only way the Labour plans would really help them pollwise is if the public felt that a radical change was needed and were willing to roll the dice.
One labour policy I find puzzling is banning free schools and academies. Some of their key voter groups in cities put a high store on academic achievement for their children.
Telling them their school is closing down and becoming a comp - have they thought this through?
I'm really starting to wonder how Labour are going to manage the competing demands from all the special interest groups they're cultivating. We've already seen a split open up on the Muslim/LGBT front with regards to education, and the feminist/trans rights situation seems to get more complicated by the day. It's surely only a matter of time before we get animal welfare right vs Muslims (and Jews, not that that's likely to matter) on ritual slaughter, and potentially a parallel issue on circumcision. I guess they'll all stay together at least as long as they can agree they hate the Tories more than anyone else.
I think we’ll see by the weekend polls whether Labours manifesto is going to crash and burn .
Personally I think they’ve made a mistake by including too many proposals and the manifesto to use an analogy is like one of those albums which has a few good songs and a load of rubbish fillers .
And I’m saying this as a normal Labour voter , would it stop me from voting Labour, no , because I don’t expect the full manifesto would ever be implemented even if a miracle happened and they got elected .
I do feel the only way the Labour plans would really help them pollwise is if the public felt that a radical change was needed and were willing to roll the dice.
I’m not convinced that’s where the public are.
Well for what it’s worth my soft left Mrs who was very prescient about T May damaging herself by ducking out of the debates last time, totally unprompted (honest!) said this morning and I quote “well any concerns I had about not voting Labour have just gone. I’ve just listened to that McDonnell on Radio 4. What a total bloody list of failed 70’s policies”.
Hardly scientific, sample of one, might mean Jezza on plus 7 come the next polls, but she ain’t usually far off.
"Deleting my tweets from yesterday on the Labour manifesto as the party is now putting out a contradictory briefing which suggests they don’t acknowledge a distinction between sex & gender. Feels reminiscent of their Brexit policy: a fudge to avoid losing votes on either side."
Anyone know what`s going on here? Sex is biological whereas gender is how an individual chooses to identify. Didn`t think there was controversy over this?
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
Apperently BoJo's labour opponent in Uxbridge was very anti semitic when he was head of Brunel Uni student union.
The news on Labour’s abortion policy must be wrong or misinterpreted, surely?
I would give them the benefit of the doubt on the content, but would expect some clarification.
It may be ambiguous, badly worded, mischievously misrepresented or misunderstood. I do not believe they are so unconnected to life, morality and reality to propose a full term - 1 day abortion limit.
Latest @IpsosMORI shows Labour’s party image suffering over the last two years. Their ratings on being divided, extreme, and fit to govern have got worse, on all of which they trail the Conservatives. (1/4) https://t.co/4rDcZe0qsGhttps://t.co/TZZs6eBiKT
IanB2 said: Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
Looks like strong defences being mounted in Guildford, Hastings and Rye, Crawley and Milton Keynes North and South. They have many more events than anywhere else.
Strong offence in Reading East.
Make of that what you will.
Crawley is the key one.
It is very white working class, and if tories are going there, they haven't put a majority away yet.
The Labour abortion policy is really on the law because currently abortion is illegal but has exceptions . Any policy change would then have to be debated and voted on in the Commons where limits would be put.
The Labour proposal is just making abortion legal. I think Labour need to clarify what exactly the term limits they would think acceptable .
This debate has passed me by somewhat, I assumed it was more just that the labour policy is sloppily drafted and it appears if carried out literally would have unforeseen effects, but that thats clearly not their intent. Is that right?
One labour policy I find puzzling is banning free schools and academies. Some of their key voter groups in cities put a high store on academic achievement for their children.
Telling them their school is closing down and becoming a comp - have they thought this through?
It's similar to their obsession with banning the use of outsourcing in the NHS. So all those people who are delighted that they can now get good care in places like the Horder Centre in Sussex are in for a shock if the policy is ever implemented.
However, Labour are throwing so many half-baked, eye-wateringly expensive, ideologically-motivated and often plain bonkers policies at voters that things like these won't get noticed, unless the Tories are really, really good at targetted messaging.
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna 36% Laura Pidcock 32% Iain Duncan Smith 30% Yvette Cooper 30% John Redwood 29% Jo Swinson 22% Boris Johnson 20% Jacob Rees-Mogg 18% Dominic Raab 17% Emily Thornberry
Depressingly low odds. I'd feel most bad a out Chuka, as while I'm not really a fan of his I respect that he took personal action to back up his words, rather than some rather shameful self promoters who get feted for tough talk then do nothing.
Time for you all the review your bets on the SCons. Keith and Cullen ward in Moray and SNP not winning here. If the swing from the SNP to the SCons is replicated in 3 weeks then whoever had that bet on SCons winning up to 16 seats may be on a winner. Perth, Lanark and Hamilton East among other seats would clearly be in play!
Comments
Islam opposes abortion except in the case of saving the life of the mother, certainly late term abortions as Labour wants now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada
Wonder what it is for Anglicans. I remember my old history teacher calling the CofE the 'tory party at prayer'
Shows how old I am...
What am I getting wrong here?
One thing we haven't seem to discussed much is who could be Labour leader based on two criteria:
1: Who survives - ie Pidcock is touted but could lose her seat.
2: The percentage of MPs/MEPs threshold requirement for nominations.
There was talk a couple of years ago that if Corbyn left early then a Corbynista might fail to be nominated. But what are the rules now regarding the percentages and would the Corbynista NEC change them?
Have the Corbynistas managed to get enough MPs into safe seats to secure one of their own the leadership?
Actually if you look back at the results his maj was only 6,000 at one point against a very strong liberal challenge.
I even voted for Kinnock in 87 but this is not a serious programme for government it's simply a set of slogans so they can slip into their comfort zone of opposition politics and avoid the hard job of actually being responsible for the economy.
That was done after the 2015 election . The Muslim vote makes up at least 10% in 83 constituencies.
He really was that stupid.
I wonder what kind of hysterical and inaccurate stories about Labour we can expect tomorrow, spread with gay abandon by PM Tory shills?
Looks like strong defences being mounted in Guildford, Hastings and Rye, Crawley and Milton Keynes North and South. They have many more events than anywhere else.
Strong offence in Reading East.
Make of that what you will.
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1197846957420679169?s=20
This is why using 'income' as the primary barometer for taxation and wealth redistribution is fundamentally flawed. Even for those who believe in such things.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791184/NS_Table_3_15_1617.xlsx
The data come from the 2016/17 tax year so a bit out of date.
For Caithness Sunderland and Easter Ross the medium income is £23,600
The IFS has also published research into the top 1% of income tax payers.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/BN253-Characteristics-and-Incomes-Of-The-Top-1%.pdf
"Employees file out and they get to hear climate emergency speeches from XR people with megaphones."
I'm sure they will be very receptive.
Guildford could be interesting with Anne Milton standing as an Independent. I wouldn't like to guess how it will go, but the fact that it is on that list suggests it may be close.
Have they forgotten the East End tube incident already?
You have to feel for voters who troop down the polling station to vote for Cameron or May and end up with a tit like him as their MP.
Still have no idea what Labour is suggesting.
https://order-order.com/2019/11/22/friday-caption-contest-43/
Anyway, the precise wording in the Labour manifesto, having looked it up, on abortion is this: “ We will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions. .
That can be read as meaning that there should be no time limits within which an abortion can happen ie you could get an abortion the day before your due date.
If that is what is intended it is to me quite horrible. An abortion at a very late stage of pregnancy is an induced labour of a viable child.
Perhaps we will get clarification of what this means.
But also, these are apparently telegram messages, something that is nigh impossible to prove who they come from / go to. This could easily be some people making stuff up and trying to make XR look bad in the wake of Hallam being a complete arsehole.
Wanting to help the poor and believing that the best way to help the poor is through the iron hand of Big State rather than personal charity is a *massive* ideological leap though.
The 'Jesus was a Socialist' brigade generally don't understand this, despite a complete lack of any scripture pointing to Our Lord favouring big earthly government, and a reasonable amount suggesting that he was, in fact,skeptical towards, and disruptive of it...
I expect Labour will hold it with a reduced majority.
The tube train was a portent. If they don’t ease off people are likely to get hurt, which isn’t good all ways round obviously.
have access to abortions in Northern Ireland .
Personally I think they’ve made a mistake by including too many proposals and the manifesto to use an analogy is like one of those albums which has a few good songs and a load of rubbish fillers .
And I’m saying this as a normal Labour voter , would it stop me from voting Labour, no , because I don’t expect the full manifesto would ever be implemented even if a miracle happened and they got elected .
I do feel the only way the Labour plans would really help them pollwise is if the public felt that a radical change was needed and were willing to roll the dice.
I’m not convinced that’s where the public are.
https://twitter.com/helenlewis/status/1197778910836117504?s=20
Telling them their school is closing down and becoming a comp - have they thought this through?
https://twitter.com/DrRobertZands/status/1197659658187689985?s=20
PS. Kudos to the guys who came as policemen.
Hardly scientific, sample of one, might mean Jezza on plus 7 come the next polls, but she ain’t usually far off.
"Deleting my tweets from yesterday on the Labour manifesto as the party is now putting out a contradictory briefing which suggests they don’t acknowledge a distinction between sex & gender. Feels reminiscent of their Brexit policy: a fudge to avoid losing votes on either side."
Anyone know what`s going on here? Sex is biological whereas gender is how an individual chooses to identify. Didn`t think there was controversy over this?
Pile on Scons.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1197863609197645825
It may be ambiguous, badly worded, mischievously misrepresented or misunderstood. I do not believe they are so unconnected to life, morality and reality to propose a full term - 1 day abortion limit.
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1197878300724678658?s=20
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1197878882860490752?s=20
Here are the chances of a few high profile MPs LOSING, based on Ladbrokes's latest odds.
65% Chuka Umunna
36% Laura Pidcock
32% Iain Duncan Smith
30% Yvette Cooper
30% John Redwood
29% Jo Swinson
22% Boris Johnson
20% Jacob Rees-Mogg
18% Dominic Raab
17% Emily Thornberry
Wollaston, Gyimah, Lee?
https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1197875857676734464?s=20
See earlier tweets for caveats
It is very white working class, and if tories are going there, they haven't put a majority away yet.
Con Leavers have returned home to Con.
BXP will absorb Labour voters who will never vote Tory.
However, Labour are throwing so many half-baked, eye-wateringly expensive, ideologically-motivated and often plain bonkers policies at voters that things like these won't get noticed, unless the Tories are really, really good at targetted messaging.
One of the anthem suggestions the SRU rejected?