Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Not listen to these people though. Have you ever tried to interact with people from extinction rebellion? Borderline mentally ill. And barely borderline.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
He's right though. The typical voter attending a climate change hustings will be tending Green.
Nothing a Tory candidate can or will say will change enough votes to make it worthwhile.
In the previous thread a lot of Labour supporters were talking about wealth and inequality. If that's a crucial issue for voters, why do they think it is that the biggest swings from Labour to the Tories at the election are likely to be in less wealthy areas like Stoke-on-Trent, Grimsby, Scunthorpe, etc, whereas pretty wealthy constituencies like Chipping Barnet, Cambridge and Canterbury are likely to be pretty good for Labour?
They are interested in inequality, but mainly of the intersectional identity-based kind.
They are interested in redistributing wealth, but mainly to students, graduates and those affiliated in the public sector unions.
I think the rest is largely just a stick to beat the Tories with.
They are happy with WWC voters voting for them but, if they desert, they will see them as traitors.
Labour's manifesto promises to repeal Tory cuts to benefits, increase the minimum wage, increase workers' rights, improve local public transport, fund public services properly, build more social housing and pay for it by raising taxes on the rich. I don't think your analysis stands up to scrutiny.
shame we don't have enough "rich" to pay for it all, so it will be tax the ass off everyone again
10-19 10/11 20-29 7/4 9 seats and under 10/1 30-39 10/1 40-49 25/1 50-59 40/1
ie. n/c
Hard to credit given the hype 3 months ago.
It does make you wonder what their fortunes would have been if rather than adopting shrill obstinacy on the question of Brexit the past 3 years, they had accepted the result. e EU but staying in the Single Market is the best economic course, is the path best placed to bind our Union and would be the best compromise for a country that desperately wants to come back together and move on. We'd get the benefits of leaving the common farming and fisheries policies, the ability to strike independent trade deals in the UK's interests and our annual payments to Brussels would fall sharply.
We will not enter coalition talks with any party that seeks to block the first referendum result or pursue a needless second referendum. But we will also make it our red-line in any potential coalition talks that the UK in entirety remains in the Single Market after Brexit."
Ally this with their fiscally dry spending and tax plans, as well as a firm refusal to countenance a second independence referendum, both of which have been drowned out in the noise.
And voila, they probably get a Cleggasm level of seats with strong recovery in SE England and Scotland and very possibly hold the balance of power.
Not viable. Something like 2/3 of the LD membership joined after the referendum as rejectionists. I expect a Tory majority of about 40 seats, and Brexit to happen. At that point the party will switch to advocating a Norway plus relationship, with a view to later re-entry. Not that I am convinced that the EU would want us back.
Brexit is a crock of shit that solves none of the problems of the left behind areas, but they will take some time to realise that. What does concern me more is the plans in the Tory manifesto for constitutional reform, significantly reducing restraint on the executive by judiciary and parliament. Thinking Tories should pause and consider how they would feel if Jezza had those powers. One day, one of his lieutenants will.
Yes, the rather bland and casual reference to reform the relationship between courts, government and parliament could be hiding some very suspect plans. That worry is not helped by the inclusion of that section obviously being a reaction to high profile court losses, and we know from statements at the time from senior politicians and party supporters that their reaction will be vindictive and punitive rather than evaluative.
Squeaky bum time for the SNP? Black dashed is 2017, gold is 2019. National polls only so rounding is an issue!
Difficult to tell what the election is about up there. I have good friends up there, traditional labour but hating the SNP. They live in Glasgow. Where to go?
This might be showing that pollsters are doing a better job. In 2017 they got 3.1% nationally, and the latest Scottish polls show them to be in a similar position to last time.
@ RobD Thanks for the graphs you post. It struck me that a useful additional layer of analysis, rather than just looking at the voting intentions and the gap, might be a chart of the rate of Labour's closing the gap, 2017 vs now.
Makes Perth and north Perthshire look interesting.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Challenging candidates with awkward questions is democracy (and activism) at its best.
Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject.
View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
I do find the overly aggressive approach of Neil and Paxman as off putting, and the constant interruptions by both interviewer and interviewee just rude. Apart from anything else by letting a politician speak often they gotcha themselves.
This is a pretty degraded election all round, but also I haven't been able to participate much because of work and church commitments, so am feeling unusually disengaged.
p.s. Latest model outputs are cold but not seismic. There's a difference. At the moment I'd say it's fine. Some snow midweek and more on Friday but nothing like what was showing 24 hours ago, which would have been highly problematic. There will be heavy snow in the Scottish highlands but I guess that's fairly normal.
I'm relieved. I had a particular concern that I picked up yesterday about Labour supporters which I'll explain next Thursday
This campaign, unfortunately, has been full of hustings and meetings where opposition activists have attended to shout down abuse Conservative candidates.
Exactly. Why Extinction Rebellion should hold a hustings and then DEMAND that all candidates attend says it all. If they want a hearing then put up a bloody candidate.
We have another hustings in Totnes called by the Greens, even though they have not put up a candidate (to help get Sarah Wollaston elected as a LibDem). Hats off to our Conservative candidate, he is going to attend. He's happy to have a civil discussion - but no doubt will be shouted down like he was by his opponents in the previous hustings.
We'll let a week Thursday show whose approach the voters prefer.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room. Environmentalism is riddled with far left extremism. Climate change is their canvas to redraw the world how they want it. A candidate could be single handedly be saving the planet, but hey would still boo him if he was a conservative.
XR are putting cause of climate change mitigation back every time they open their mouths.
I dont think they are. A lot of them are annoying and overblown, and that for some the environmental aspects are just part of a wider wish to reshape society politically is certainly true, but in just the past year there really does seem to have been a change in the way politicians and media talk about climate change, and that does seem down to XR types and their actions.
While the response will not please XR as nothing could, and a lot of the time talk is just talk, theres been so much I do think there will be some actual outcomes too. Doesnt make some of them any less irritating or seeking personal attention through histrionics though.
This campaign, unfortunately, has been full of hustings and meetings where opposition activists have attended to shout down abuse Conservative candidates.
Hard to shout down Conservative candidates if they don't even turn up. Just another born to rule Tory who thinks that contact with the electorate is beneath them. Speaking of which, when is Johnson going to talk to Andrew Neil? Or is he too much of a liar, coward and cheat to do it? Sad.
He seems to have weathered the storm on that piece of cowardice. If he agrees to it now it'll be because Corbyn whoops him on Friday and he needs to risk it to change the story.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Challenging candidates with awkward questions is democracy (and activism) at its best.
Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject.
View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.
And ironically they’re not that interested in science either. I’ve certainly learnt over the last year or so, especially since the IPCC special report and the hysteria following it is that many of those claiming to be environmentalists are often very poorly informed, and when their assumptions are challenged react in a way a devoted religious person reacts when you poke holes in what they see as their core belief system.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Not listen to these people though. Have you ever tried to interact with people from extinction rebellion? Borderline mentally ill. And barely borderline.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
On topic, Ken Clarke has simply been through the weathering and erosion processes of very old rocks, and has survived.
He is now officially a National Treasure, and people who never liked him and never voted for him have forgotten why.
The same happened to Tony Wedgwood Benn. The middle classes loathed and feared him when there was a real prospect of him gaining power and forcing change. Once that was no longer the case, he become a National Treasure, and the same people happily spent £50 a ticket to hear him reminisce fondly in theatres.
I expect the same thing will happen to Corby. Once he has been forced out of front line politics, the very people yelling anti-semitism at him will be penning thoughtful and regretful critiques about how the UK was not ready for the radicalism of our new National Treasure. Cyclefree will write a reflexive header for pb.com. There will be much talk of allotments and home-made jam (just like jazz and cigars for our Ken).
It is the fear of old age in all of us. We always feel sorry for the tiger who no longer roars, but moves awkwardly on arthritic legs.
There may be something in what you say. A corollary to everyone getting nice or at least neutral tributes when they die (the only exception to this from a political perspective in recent times I can recall was Ian Paisley, who many still said was a nasty piece of work)
I hadn't realised Macmillan was so far ahead of his time, applying to join an organisation that wouldn't exist until after he had died.
Pedantic maybe, but important to remember that the EU is not the same as the EEC, or the EC. The status quo is rarely on offer for long.
The core principle, of ever closer union, was there from the start. Remember Hugh Gaitskell?
Fight, fight, and fight again... to join the European superstate we love?
What does federation mean? It means that powers are taken from national governments and to federal parliaments. It means - I repeat it - that, if we go into this, we are no more than a state (as it were) in the United States of Europe, such as Texas and California. They are remarkably friendly examples; you do not find every state as rich or having such good weather as those two! But I could take others; it would be the same as in Australia, where you have Western Australia, for example, and New South Wales. We should be like them. This is what it means; it does mean the end of Britain as an independent nation state. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but we must recognise that this is so...
We must be clear about this; it does mean, if this is the idea, the end of Britain as an independent European state. I make no apology for repeating it. It means the end of a thousand years of history.
your maths is off
2019 - 871 > 1000
Bullshit maths is a pretty common currency with some posters on here
i’m just surprise no one has questioned my choice of 871
We all just assumed it was some important family birthday.
I don’t think i’m related to Alfred 😆
You almost certainly are! I would expect that the chances of being white British and not being descended from Alfred must be so slim as to be effectively zero.
My roots are largely Norman though...
(actually we probably are but we have about a 12 year gap in our records so can’t prove it)
Aren’t they talking to Princess Anne? If Trump thinks Johnson’s been laughing at him there will be hell to pay.
If ever there was a leader of a democratic nation who would react in a seriously dumb and damaging way because of gentle ribbing from other leaders it is Donald Trump. Is there a more fragile ego on the planet?
On topic, Ken Clarke has simply been through the weathering and erosion processes of very old rocks, and has survived.
He is now officially a National Treasure, and people who never liked him and never voted for him have forgotten why.
The same happened to Tony Wedgwood Benn. The middle classes loathed and feared him when there was a real prospect of him gaining power and forcing change. Once that was no longer the case, he become a National Treasure, and the same people happily spent £50 a ticket to hear him reminisce fondly in theatres.
I expect the same thing will happen to Corby. Once he has been forced out of front line politics, the very people yelling anti-semitism at him will be penning thoughtful and regretful critiques about how the UK was not ready for the radicalism of our new National Treasure. Cyclefree will write a reflexive header for pb.com. There will be much talk of allotments and home-made jam (just like jazz and cigars for our Ken).
It is the fear of old age in all of us. We always feel sorry for the tiger who no longer roars, but moves awkwardly on arthritic legs.
A thoughtful post, though I’d happily lay money that Cyclefree would ever write a post in the future arguing Corbyn was a national treasure!
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Although that does presuppose the current crop of politicians think anything worth saying.
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
If you cut out the rest of what I said of course it's easy to refute! The suggestion was every time they open their mouths they damage their own cause, not that some of the time they do.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
They give us what we actually want, unfortunately.
I hadn't realised Macmillan was so far ahead of his time, applying to join an organisation that wouldn't exist until after he had died.
Pedantic maybe, but important to remember that the EU is not the same as the EEC, or the EC. The status quo is rarely on offer for long.
The core principle, of ever closer union, was there from the start. Remember Hugh Gaitskell?
Fight, fight, and fight again... to join the European superstate we love?
What does federation mean? It means that powers are taken from national governments and to federal parliaments. It means - I repeat it - that, if we go into this, we are no more than a state (as it were) in the United States of Europe, such as Texas and California. They are remarkably friendly examples; you do not find every state as rich or having such good weather as those two! But I could take others; it would be the same as in Australia, where you have Western Australia, for example, and New South Wales. We should be like them. This is what it means; it does mean the end of Britain as an independent nation state. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but we must recognise that this is so...
We must be clear about this; it does mean, if this is the idea, the end of Britain as an independent European state. I make no apology for repeating it. It means the end of a thousand years of history.
your maths is off
2019 - 871 > 1000
That was then Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell in 1962 opposing British membership of the EEC!
If you cut out the rest of what I said of course it's easy to refute! The suggestion was every time they open their mouths they damage their own cause, not that some of the time they do.
Well, that was one example. But I have to say I think it was an example that illustrated the point nicely. I do think they are wrecking their own cause, which is a shame as it’s a very important one.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Challenging candidates with awkward questions is democracy (and activism) at its best.
Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject.
View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.
And ironically they’re not that interested in science either. I’ve certainly learnt over the last year or so, especially since the IPCC special report and the hysteria following it is that many of those claiming to be environmentalists are often very poorly informed, and when their assumptions are challenged react in a way a devoted religious person reacts when you poke holes in what they see as their core belief system.
Indeed, including the new religion of Veganism.
The BBC surprised me by publishing this well-balanced piece including passages from some very respected scientists and analysts who cast serious doubt on the “meat is bad for the environment” orthodoxy:
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
They give us what we actually want, unfortunately.
Partisan supporters do. I found Corbyn being taken apart by Neil amusing, I can’t deny it. Was it informative though? I am not so sure.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Not listen to these people though. Have you ever tried to interact with people from extinction rebellion? Borderline mentally ill. And barely borderline.
At the least they are experts in moving goalposts and, one hopes, unintentionally severe - ive heard some say that all spending and attention should be on the climate emergency; I hope not literally given the need to spend on health and social care, for example .
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room. Environmentalism is riddled with far left extremism. Climate change is their canvas to redraw the world how they want it. A candidate could be single handedly be saving the planet, but hey would still boo him if he was a conservative.
XR are putting cause of climate change mitigation back every time they open their mouths.
I dont think they are. A lot of them are annoying and overblown, and that for some the environmental aspects are just part of a wider wish to reshape society politically is certainly true, but in just the past year there really does seem to have been a change in the way politicians and media talk about climate change, and that does seem down to XR types and their actions.
While the response will not please XR as nothing could, and a lot of the time talk is just talk, theres been so much I do think there will be some actual outcomes too. Doesnt make some of them any less irritating or seeking personal attention through histrionics though.
But, correlation doesn’t equal causation.
A lot of the XR lot are middle-class Johnny come latelys who’ve just wanted to jump on the bandwagon, and have ended up pissing everyone off.
I’d agree that Greta Thunberg had an impact (though she risks going slightly off the boil now as she politicises) and also the BBC, particularly David Attenborough.
"Another candidate said the party had not bothered to include a promised rail fare reduction announced on Monday on their campaign Facebook page, because it was just likely to increase voter scepticism about whether the party’s programme is deliverable."
The morph-ing of the Labour Party into Moneysavingexpert.com has been one of the strangest things about this election.
There are retail offers on train fares. There is free super-fast broadband. There is more money saving on childcare and utility bills. WASPI women can grab their cash with a handy calculator on the Labour party website. Students can reclaim tuition fees -- and you can get a bit more cash back if you click through on the link on the Labour party website.
It seems Labour's vision for the future of Britain is Martin Lewis on steroids.
Martin Lewis's solution to tuition fees is to rename them as 'graduate contribution scheme'....
It’s the obvious answer for the Tories in my view. Switch tuition fees to a graduate tax for life; gets rid of the interest and debt optics and makes it more progressive as everyone pays, and there’s none of this nonsense of writing it all off in 30 years time.
You could keep maintenance loans as loans, or switch to an additional tax.
Not sure what to do with existing loans though - probably convert to graduate tax too.
Don’t know the numbers - but if it worked at a 1% income tax supplement for life it would be great. “A penny for a world-class university education”.
The problem with existing graduates is that conversion to a tax it is terribly unfair if you've paid back £29,000 of your £30,000 in debt, while your friend has paid back nothing.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Although that does presuppose the current crop of politicians think anything worth saying.
Well we’ll never know, will we. And after the evasions, the ducking and diving and obfuscation one of them will be our PM. What will he do then?
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
Another argument for PR, at least in local government. In too many such areas, both council and parliamentary seats are safe, and very often simply taken for granted by their councillors and MP. Speak to Labour activists who are suddenly sent to such an area when a challenging election suddenly appears, and they return exasperated that they have no voter records, no organisation - because no real campaigning has ever been done there. The MP has simply acted like a grandee sent off to parliament every five years. Indeed I recall such reports on PB from Bolsolver back in 2017.
Things are as bad in many Tory safe seats, of course, but there is greater and more pressing need for activist politicians in left leaning areas.
"Another candidate said the party had not bothered to include a promised rail fare reduction announced on Monday on their campaign Facebook page, because it was just likely to increase voter scepticism about whether the party’s programme is deliverable."
The morph-ing of the Labour Party into Moneysavingexpert.com has been one of the strangest things about this election.
There are retail offers on train fares. There is free super-fast broadband. There is more money saving on childcare and utility bills. WASPI women can grab their cash with a handy calculator on the Labour party website. Students can reclaim tuition fees -- and you can get a bit more cash back if you click through on the link on the Labour party website.
It seems Labour's vision for the future of Britain is Martin Lewis on steroids.
Martin Lewis's solution to tuition fees is to rename them as 'graduate contribution scheme'....
It’s the obvious answer for the Tories in my view. Switch tuition fees to a graduate tax for life; gets rid of the interest and debt optics and makes it more progressive as everyone pays, and there’s none of this nonsense of writing it all off in 30 years time.
You could keep maintenance loans as loans, or switch to an additional tax.
Not sure what to do with existing loans though - probably convert to graduate tax too.
Don’t know the numbers - but if it worked at a 1% income tax supplement for life it would be great. “A penny for a world-class university education”.
The problem with existing graduates is that conversion to a tax it is terribly unfair if you've paid back £29,000 of your £30,000 in debt, while your friend has paid back nothing.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Although that does presuppose the current crop of politicians think anything worth saying.
Well we’ll never know, will we. And after the evasions, the ducking and diving and obfuscation one of them will be our PM. What will he do then?
Completely bugger things up. And if it’s Johnson, get the chop very rapidly. He was elected to win an election, he won’t last long if he doesn’t prove effective.
If you cut out the rest of what I said of course it's easy to refute! The suggestion was every time they open their mouths they damage their own cause, not that some of the time they do.
Well, that was one example. But I have to say I think it was an example that illustrated the point nicely. I do think they are wrecking their own cause, which is a shame as it’s a very important one.
I think they have a danger of imploding as a movement if the passion and drive which has been harnessed effectively, even in disruptive protests, crosses lines to stupid stunts from attention seekers, and adopts religious style doctrine over evidence even when people and governments make genuine and serious efforts to address issues.
I think a lot of people worry and feel guilty about the environment and give leeway to those badgering them about it. But that can turn quickly if the badgering never let's up and even increases even when actions are taken.
Edit: A quick way to make a grateful person ungrateful is to demand they be grateful, and a quick way to put people off trying to help the environment is to harass people about it when they are trying to do so.
I hadn't realised Macmillan was so far ahead of his time, applying to join an organisation that wouldn't exist until after he had died.
Pedantic maybe, but important to remember that the EU is not the same as the EEC, or the EC. The status quo is rarely on offer for long.
The core principle, of ever closer union, was there from the start. Remember Hugh Gaitskell?
Fight, fight, and fight again... to join the European superstate we love?
What does federation mean? It means that powers are taken from national governments and to federal parliaments. It means - I repeat it - that, if we go into this, we are no more than a state (as it were) in the United States of Europe, such as Texas and California. They are remarkably friendly examples; you do not find every state as rich or having such good weather as those two! But I could take others; it would be the same as in Australia, where you have Western Australia, for example, and New South Wales. We should be like them. This is what it means; it does mean the end of Britain as an independent nation state. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but we must recognise that this is so...
We must be clear about this; it does mean, if this is the idea, the end of Britain as an independent European state. I make no apology for repeating it. It means the end of a thousand years of history.
your maths is off
2019 - 871 > 1000
Bullshit maths is a pretty common currency with some posters on here
i’m just surprise no one has questioned my choice of 871
I would if I'd been here earlier. 927 is the traditional date for the foundation of the Kingdom of England, and the Kingdom of Great Britain was, of course, only created in 1707. So there.
886 as the crowning of the first King of the Anglo-Saxons I could understand... but Alfred ruled Wessex from 871
I hadn't realised Macmillan was so far ahead of his time, applying to join an organisation that wouldn't exist until after he had died.
Pedantic maybe, but important to remember that the EU is not the same as the EEC, or the EC. The status quo is rarely on offer for long.
The core principle, of ever closer union, was there from the start. Remember Hugh Gaitskell?
Fight, fight, and fight again... to join the European superstate we love?
What does federation mean? It means that powers are taken from national governments and to federal parliaments. It means - I repeat it - that, if we go into this, we are no more than a state (as it were) in the United States of Europe, such as Texas and California. They are remarkably friendly examples; you do not find every state as rich or having such good weather as those two! But I could take others; it would be the same as in Australia, where you have Western Australia, for example, and New South Wales. We should be like them. This is what it means; it does mean the end of Britain as an independent nation state. It may be a good thing or a bad thing, but we must recognise that this is so...
We must be clear about this; it does mean, if this is the idea, the end of Britain as an independent European state. I make no apology for repeating it. It means the end of a thousand years of history.
your maths is off
2019 - 871 > 1000
That was then Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell in 1962 opposing British membership of the EEC!
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
We're waiting for it to happen in Wales. Oh, glorious day.
When I was in Ireland recently, they had a beautifully pragmatic view of the role of the TDs. I repeatedly heard, "Yes, he's a grand TD, he has bought a lot of Government money into North Kildare". Or Limerick. Or whatever. At least, the TDs recognized their job was to fight for their constituents.
The Welsh Labour MPs have done nothing for the South Wales valleys. Their master is the Labour party.
There is no better example than the Barnett formula. Despite the fact that this impoverishes Wales (& the North of England) relative to other regions, the South Walian Labour MPs all voted for it. It was good for Labour party unity.
I wil never forgive the Labour party for the damage it has inflicted on Wales.
The Scots showed the way. I have no doubt that the constituents in the Scottish central belt are better off with SNP MPs arguing their cause than vacuous Labour MPs, serving the interests of Labour in Westminster.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room. Environmentalism is riddled with far left extremism. Climate change is their canvas to redraw the world how they want it. A candidate could be single handedly be saving the planet, but hey would still boo him if he was a conservative.
XR are putting cause of climate change mitigation back every time they open their mouths.
I dont think they are. A lot of them are annoying and overblown, and that for some the environmental aspects are just part of a wider wish to reshape society politically is certainly true, but in just the past year there really does seem to have been a change in the way politicians and media talk about climate change, and that does seem down to XR types and their actions.
While the response will not please XR as nothing could, and a lot of the time talk is just talk, theres been so much I do think there will be some actual outcomes too. Doesnt make some of them any less irritating or seeking personal attention through histrionics though.
But, correlation doesn’t equal causation.
A lot of the XR lot are middle-class Johnny come latelys who’ve just wanted to jump on the bandwagon, and have ended up pissing everyone off.
I’d agree that Greta Thunberg had an impact (though she risks going slightly off the boil now as she politicises) and also the BBC, particularly David Attenborough.
The only people who will prevent climate change are cutting edge scientists. Give them a bunch of money - and let them get on with it.
Extinction Rebellion don't want to hear that though. They are the Khmer Rouge of environmentalism, wanting to turn the clock back to Year Zero Carbon.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
which is why you need a constructive and a collaborative approach
On topic, Ken Clarke has simply been through the weathering and erosion processes of very old rocks, and has survived.
He is now officially a National Treasure, and people who never liked him and never voted for him have forgotten why.
The same happened to Tony Wedgwood Benn. The middle classes loathed and feared him when there was a real prospect of him gaining power and forcing change. Once that was no longer the case, he become a National Treasure, and the same people happily spent £50 a ticket to hear him reminisce fondly in theatres.
I expect the same thing will happen to Corby. Once he has been forced out of front line politics, the very people yelling anti-semitism at him will be penning thoughtful and regretful critiques about how the UK was not ready for the radicalism of our new National Treasure. Cyclefree will write a reflexive header for pb.com. There will be much talk of allotments and home-made jam (just like jazz and cigars for our Ken).
It is the fear of old age in all of us. We always feel sorry for the tiger who no longer roars, but moves awkwardly on arthritic legs.
A thoughtful post, though I’d happily lay money that Cyclefree would ever write a post in the future arguing Corbyn was a national treasure!
Just listen to yourself. When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
Challenging candidates with awkward questions is democracy (and activism) at its best. Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject. View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.
And ironically they’re not that interested in science either. I’ve certainly learnt over the last year or so, especially since the IPCC special report and the hysteria following it is that many of those claiming to be environmentalists are often very poorly informed, and when their assumptions are challenged react in a way a devoted religious person reacts when you poke holes in what they see as their core belief system.
Indeed, including the new religion of Veganism. The BBC surprised me by publishing this well-balanced piece including passages from some very respected scientists and analysts who cast serious doubt on the “meat is bad for the environment” orthodoxy: https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/meat_environment
Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet. Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.
"Another candidate said the party had not bothered to include a promised rail fare reduction announced on Monday on their campaign Facebook page, because it was just likely to increase voter scepticism about whether the party’s programme is deliverable."
The morph-ing of the Labour Party into Moneysavingexpert.com has been one of the strangest things about this election.
There are retail offers on train fares. There is free super-fast broadband. There is more money saving on childcare and utility bills. WASPI women can grab their cash with a handy calculator on the Labour party website. Students can reclaim tuition fees -- and you can get a bit more cash back if you click through on the link on the Labour party website.
It seems Labour's vision for the future of Britain is Martin Lewis on steroids.
Martin Lewis's solution to tuition fees is to rename them as 'graduate contribution scheme'....
It’s the obvious answer for the Tories in my view. Switch tuition fees to a graduate tax for life; gets rid of the interest and debt optics and makes it more progressive as everyone pays, and there’s none of this nonsense of writing it all off in 30 years time.
You could keep maintenance loans as loans, or switch to an additional tax.
Not sure what to do with existing loans though - probably convert to graduate tax too.
Don’t know the numbers - but if it worked at a 1% income tax supplement for life it would be great. “A penny for a world-class university education”.
The problem with existing graduates is that conversion to a tax it is terribly unfair if you've paid back £29,000 of your £30,000 in debt, while your friend has paid back nothing.
give them the option
A perfect and simple solution. I like that.
Yes. I’ve thought about this a bit. You would need actuarial assessment to get it right, but it is cost natural and it’s a big sabre tooth sized dead cat to throw on the table. Though details about maintenance loans still need to be thought through. Graduate tax with the option for existing debtors to move over from the loan to the tax. It will almost certainly not be better off for anyone if set right (as Martin Lewis will point out I’m sure) but it will no longer be a loan and for some that is more important.
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room.
Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.
which is why you need a constructive and a collaborative approach
Good. Any candidate who turns up at these things is their own worst enemy. There wouldn’t be a single supporter in the room. Environmentalism is riddled with far left extremism. Climate change is their canvas to redraw the world how they want it. A candidate could be single handedly be saving the planet, but hey would still boo him if he was a conservative.
XR are putting cause of climate change mitigation back every time they open their mouths.
I dont think they are. A lot of them are annoying and overblown, and that for some the environmental aspects are just part of a wider wish to reshape society politically is certainly true, but in just the past year there really does seem to have been a change in the way politicians and media talk about climate change, and that does seem down to XR types and their actions.
While the response will not please XR as nothing could, and a lot of the time talk is just talk, theres been so much I do think there will be some actual outcomes too. Doesnt make some of them any less irritating or seeking personal attention through histrionics though.
But, correlation doesn’t equal causation.
A lot of the XR lot are middle-class Johnny come latelys who’ve just wanted to jump on the bandwagon, and have ended up pissing everyone off.
I’d agree that Greta Thunberg had an impact (though she risks going slightly off the boil now as she politicises) and also the BBC, particularly David Attenborough.
It is trendy now. I think we can generally spot the ones who really really mean it, and which ones are spouting lines as part if bandwagon jumping and trying to coopt things
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Disagree. It was a horrible interview, but because Boris deliberately filibusters Marr had no choice but to interrupt.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Although that does presuppose the current crop of politicians think anything worth saying.
Well we’ll never know, will we. And after the evasions, the ducking and diving and obfuscation one of them will be our PM. What will he do then?
Completely bugger things up. And if it’s Johnson, get the chop very rapidly. He was elected to win an election, he won’t last long if he doesn’t prove effective.
Under normal circumstances, yes. Don't forget it is never Boris' fault, and Johnson owns the Tory Party. That said, I have no doubts that the charmless baboon will win handsomely.
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
It will and to an extent already has just look at all the Tees Valley councils.
However, I don't think the problem is solvable - Look at Redcar exactly what could / can be done to create skilled high income jobs in an area with poor communication links (40 minutes to a motorway, 40 minutes to an airport, 30 minutes by train to a North South line). And they have already protested once by voting Lib Dem back in 2010.
Thatcherism was right in that something needed to replace the existing mining jobs but Norman Tebbit was far more accurate and brutally honest by saying you need to get on your bike.
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
We're waiting for it to happen in Wales. Oh, glorious day.
When I was in Ireland recently, they had a beautifully pragmatic view of the role of the TDs. I repeatedly heard, "Yes, he's a grand TD, he has bought a lot of Government money into North Kildare". Or Limerick. Or whatever. At least, the TDs recognized their job was to fight for their constituents.
The Welsh Labour MPs have done nothing for the South Wales valleys. Their master is the Labour party.
There is no better example than the Barnett formula. Despite the fact that this impoverishes Wales (& the North of England) relative to other regions, the South Walian Labour MPs all voted for it. It was good for Labour party unity.
I wil never forgive the Labour party for the damage it has inflicted on Wales.
The Scots showed the way. I have no doubt that the constituents in the Scottish central belt are better off with SNP MPs arguing their cause than vacuous Labour MPs, serving the interests of Labour in Westminster.
Do you think labours grip on wales is reaching a tipping point, even if not as dramatic as in scotland?
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
Why would Boris offer an interview after the election. That would make him another hostage to fortune and bring the lack of interview back into the news.
In the previous thread a lot of Labour supporters were talking about wealth and inequality. If that's a crucial issue for voters, why do they think it is that the biggest swings from Labour to the Tories at the election are likely to be in less wealthy areas like Stoke-on-Trent, Grimsby, Scunthorpe, etc, whereas pretty wealthy constituencies like Chipping Barnet, Cambridge and Canterbury are likely to be pretty good for Labour?
They are interested in inequality, but mainly of the intersectional identity-based kind.
They are interested in redistributing wealth, but mainly to students, graduates and those affiliated in the public sector unions.
I think the rest is largely just a stick to beat the Tories with.
They are happy with WWC voters voting for them but, if they desert, they will see them as traitors.
Labour's manifesto promises to repeal Tory cuts to benefits, increase the minimum wage, increase workers' rights, improve local public transport, fund public services properly, build more social housing and pay for it by raising taxes on the rich. I don't think your analysis stands up to scrutiny.
shame we don't have enough "rich" to pay for it all, so it will be tax the ass off everyone again
Personally I think it's inevitable that taxes will have to go up generally to fund public services given our ageing population, that is just basic arithmetic. I don't like Labour's approach to pretend the rich will pay for it all (although as a rich person I am happy to pay more). But the kind of people we have been discussing will not be paying more in tax, they can't afford to.
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
It will and to an extent already has just look at all the Tees Valley councils.
However, I don't think the problem is solvable - Look at Redcar exactly what could / can be done to create skilled high income jobs in an area with poor communication links (40 minutes to a motorway, 40 minutes to an airport, 30 minutes by train to a North South line). And they have already protested once by voting Lib Dem back in 2010.
Thatcherism was right in that something needed to replace the existing mining jobs but Norman Tebbit was far more accurate and brutally honest by saying you need to get on your bike.
I've family in Redcar. Theres some nice bits, but I'd also never come across a place that seemed to meet the stereotype of the grim northern area until there, I can totally understand the anger
Do you think labours grip on wales is reaching a tipping point, even if not as dramatic as in scotland?
I think the time is coming. Perhaps not this election, but soon.
I have paid tribute before to Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones, both of whom I regard as clever and wily politicians. They helped shore up Labour's hegemony for too long, unfortunately for Wales.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Disagree. It was a horrible interview, but because Boris deliberately filibusters Marr had no choice but to interrupt.
And Marr hectoring "You've been in power ten years!" eight times was what?
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
Because the electorate really need that information after the election, right? Born to rule arrogance.
It will and to an extent already has just look at all the Tees Valley councils.
However, I don't think the problem is solvable - Look at Redcar exactly what could / can be done to create skilled high income jobs in an area with poor communication links (40 minutes to a motorway, 40 minutes to an airport, 30 minutes by train to a North South line). And they have already protested once by voting Lib Dem back in 2010.
Thatcherism was right in that something needed to replace the existing mining jobs but Norman Tebbit was far more accurate and brutally honest by saying you need to get on your bike.
I've family in Redcar. Theres some nice bits, but I'd also never come across a place that seemed to meet the stereotype of the grim northern area until there, I can totally understand the anger
You should visit County Durham. Outside of Durham, Barnard Castle and Newton Aycliffe (note Darlington is now Tees Valley not County Durham) it's relentlessly grim. Beautiful countryside but the towns have rarely if ever seen good days and never in the past 30 years
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Disagree. It was a horrible interview, but because Boris deliberately filibusters Marr had no choice but to interrupt.
I heard that nearly half the words spoken were by Marr - that doesn't match with what you said. In a serious interview the question should be much shorter than the answer . . . and if the answer is an attempted filibuster it would be even longer.
Nick raises a poor Broxtowe estate and I know that he will have done everything that he could as a Labour MP with a Labour government to help the people there.
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
We're waiting for it to happen in Wales. Oh, glorious day.
When I was in Ireland recently, they had a beautifully pragmatic view of the role of the TDs. I repeatedly heard, "Yes, he's a grand TD, he has bought a lot of Government money into North Kildare". Or Limerick. Or whatever. At least, the TDs recognized their job was to fight for their constituents.
The Welsh Labour MPs have done nothing for the South Wales valleys. Their master is the Labour party.
There is no better example than the Barnett formula. Despite the fact that this impoverishes Wales (& the North of England) relative to other regions, the South Walian Labour MPs all voted for it. It was good for Labour party unity.
I wil never forgive the Labour party for the damage it has inflicted on Wales.
The Scots showed the way. I have no doubt that the constituents in the Scottish central belt are better off with SNP MPs arguing their cause than vacuous Labour MPs, serving the interests of Labour in Westminster.
Do you think labours grip on wales is reaching a tipping point, even if not as dramatic as in scotland?
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Disagree. It was a horrible interview, but because Boris deliberately filibusters Marr had no choice but to interrupt.
That is pure bias. Marr has been widely condemned for his interview and I wanted Boris put under pressure but not by a hysterical interviewer
I would just like to put on record that I have great reservations about Boris and in common with the vast majority I wish the choice was not between Boris or Corbyn
Corbyn is the reason I support Boris and the only reason. It is greater than Brexit for me
I hope if Boris wins he introduces more liberal policies and depending on his majority agrees a sensible FTA and the country moves the dial past 24 x 7 Brexit controversies and Corbyn is consigned to history
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
Because the electorate really need that information after the election, right? Born to rule arrogance.
Amazing to hear the establishment fanboys say not only is Brexit the fault of remainers yesterday, but today we find out the reason we dont know what the PM thinks is because of Marr, not because he refuses to do serious interviews and debates, and when he does speak he invariably tells people what is to his advantage rather than his real thoughts.
PS: Cheek to call them party leaders when they are just region office managers of London parties, none of them exist as real political Scottish parties , they just steal the "Scottish" to pretend they have any Scottish content.
It's been like that up to a point for a long time. There's a little estate in Broxtowe where people are really seriously poor. Lots of single parents, some elderly people down on their luck, some drug-dealers, nothing much to do. Most people living there are better off under Labour governments, but by and large they don't vote - life is rough, politics is for other people. What's changing is that a proportion of them voted Brexit and have now moved on to voting Tory.
It's a problem for the left that the people we think we're about helping are mostly disengaged. Just as in the US the Democrats look for votes from schoolteachers more thantrailer parks, in Britain Labour has rarely done much to try to mobilise the very poor, simply because it's so difficult - I often puzzled over it, and tried many times to interest that estate, but they were perfectly politely just not interested. At election time, it was always more promising to canvass an area with more people in work and getting something out of life.
I'm not proud of it, and one can argue that if the Tories win desperate Northern seats we had it coming. But I don't think they'll be happy with a Tory government either. A grim life is a grim life, and the differences that we all make are on the margins.
Good fair response - I have heard this measured response from various "commissions" into social justice before but they tend to be drowned out by those who are there just to progress their own welfare so usually these commissions recommend more teachers, more social welfare officers, in deed more middle classes taking the money that was genuinely meant to help these people.
And, as I suggested yesterday, if these seats do return 8 or 10 new Tory MPs, they will tend towards being local councillors or local workers - the A Listers never looked at these unlikely to win seats - vide Scott Mann in the SW. Therefore, if following if, they are elected Boris need to let these MPs get on with it and give them enough money to make a real difference to the lives of these people. The Boris I have met is up for that.
As I expected and asked last week, we’re now starting to get the luvvies (Hugh Grant and a couple of Lefty stand-up comics) standing up and saying we’re all going to hell in a handcart if we don’t kick the Tories out.
The Guardian letter can only be days away.
Dear Ashfield, Grimsby, West Bromwich, Stoke plebs,
I know in your ignorance you have already voted for Brexit please do not compound the problem by giving Boris Johnson a majority. Instead please vote for your left liberal woke candidate we approve of and go back to voting Labour like you usually do and then we can conveniently ignore you for the rest of the Parliament.
Do you think labours grip on wales is reaching a tipping point, even if not as dramatic as in scotland?
I think the time is coming. Perhaps not this election, but soon.
I have paid tribute before to Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones, both of whom I regard as clever and wily politicians. They helped shore up Labour's hegemony for too long, unfortunately for Wales.
Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.
The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.
And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what
Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that
Very poor from HYUFD
For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.
It's been like that up to a point for a long time. There's a little estate in Broxtowe where people are really seriously poor. Lots of single parents, some elderly people down on their luck, some drug-dealers, nothing much to do. Most people living there are better off under Labour governments, but by and large they don't vote - life is rough, politics is for other people. What's changing is that a proportion of them voted Brexit and have now moved on to voting Tory.
It's a problem for the left that the people we think we're about helping are mostly disengaged. Just as in the US the Democrats look for votes from schoolteachers more thantrailer parks, in Britain Labour has rarely done much to try to mobilise the very poor, simply because it's so difficult - I often puzzled over it, and tried many times to interest that estate, but they were perfectly politely just not interested. At election time, it was always more promising to canvass an area with more people in work and getting something out of life.
I'm not proud of it, and one can argue that if the Tories win desperate Northern seats we had it coming. But I don't think they'll be happy with a Tory government either. A grim life is a grim life, and the differences that we all make are on the margins.
Good fair response - I have heard this measured response from various "commissions" into social justice before but they tend to be drowned out by those who are there just to progress their own welfare so usually these commissions recommend more teachers, more social welfare officers, in deed more middle classes taking the money that was genuinely meant to help these people.
And, as I suggested yesterday, if these seats do return 8 or 10 new Tory MPs, they will tend towards being local councillors or local workers - the A Listers never looked at these unlikely to win seats - vide Scott Mann in the SW. Therefore, if following if, they are elected Boris need to let these MPs get on with it and give them enough money to make a real difference to the lives of these people. The Boris I have met is up for that.
Yet the candidates likely to win those seats aren't local councillors but those brought in from outside the area. The Tory candidate for Darlington lives outside York, their candidate in Bishop Auckland was formerly a student and comes from Sheffield. OK the Sedgefield Tory candidate lives in Darlington but wasn't liked enough to stand in the constituency he lives and is a councillor in.
Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.
The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.
And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what
Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that
Why is it crap?
Because the buffoon did not address the point , he used the usual Tory excuse of , Oh look there are people poorer than you elsewhere in the world , why are you complaining that 6 arsehole Tories have more money than 14M British people. We are addressing the disparities in the UK not the world, poor people are supposed to say , it is ok those 6 greedy barstewards have nearly all the money , I should be happy somewhere in the world someone has less money than me. Anyone who cannot reason that it is unjust that 6 people should have more money than 14M people is not right in the head.
On topic, great piece @Cyclefree. While I disagree with Ken Clarke on the subject of the EU, I agree wholeheartedly with pretty much everything else he’s ever said.
On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.
One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.
That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.
Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.
Absolutely.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
Because the electorate really need that information after the election, right? Born to rule arrogance.
Amazing to hear the establishment fanboys say not only is Brexit the fault of remainers yesterday, but today we find out the reason we dont know what the PM thinks is because of Marr, not because he refuses to do serious interviews and debates, and when he does speak he invariably tells people what is to his advantage rather than his real thoughts.
Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet. Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.
The "vegan" interior was a £3k option on my Taycan. Porsche know which way the wind is blowing.
As I expected and asked last week, we’re now starting to get the luvvies (Hugh Grant and a couple of Lefty stand-up comics) standing up and saying we’re all going to hell in a handcart if we don’t kick the Tories out.
The Guardian letter can only be days away.
Dear Ashfield, Grimsby, West Bromwich, Stoke plebs,
I know in your ignorance you have already voted for Brexit please do not compound the problem by giving Boris Johnson a majority. Instead please vote for your left liberal woke candidate we approve of and go back to voting Labour like you usually do and then we can conveniently ignore you for the rest of the Parliament.
Yours sincerely,
Hugh Grant and other luvvies,
Islington, Hampstead etc
Even if Ashfield, Grimsby.. vote for Brexit they will be ignored once this election is over until the next one.
Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.
The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.
And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what
Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that
Very poor from HYUFD
For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.
That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.
Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet. Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.
The "vegan" interior was a £3k option on my Taycan. Porsche know which way the wind is blowing.
It will and to an extent already has just look at all the Tees Valley councils.
However, I don't think the problem is solvable - Look at Redcar exactly what could / can be done to create skilled high income jobs in an area with poor communication links (40 minutes to a motorway, 40 minutes to an airport, 30 minutes by train to a North South line). And they have already protested once by voting Lib Dem back in 2010.
Thatcherism was right in that something needed to replace the existing mining jobs but Norman Tebbit was far more accurate and brutally honest by saying you need to get on your bike.
I've family in Redcar. Theres some nice bits, but I'd also never come across a place that seemed to meet the stereotype of the grim northern area until there, I can totally understand the anger
You should visit County Durham. Outside of Durham, Barnard Castle and Newton Aycliffe (note Darlington is now Tees Valley not County Durham) it's relentlessly grim. Beautiful countryside but the towns have rarely if ever seen good days and never in the past 30 years
For personal reasons I now have a connection with this area which I once only saw from over the top of the Pennines. We might moan in Cumbria but our MPs on all sides have really pushed our area and we have never felt left out - same with the Yorkshire Dales. The Labour MPs for these seats have done an absolutely terrible job for their own communities and the former MP for Sedgefield was not the worst, although he was mighty bad.
The tale about the Bishop Auckland MP mixing up Ingleton in her constituency with Ingleton in Craven surely demonstrates she does not give a f**K about Bishop providing the proles continue to vote for her.
If ever there was a leader of a democratic nation who would react in a seriously dumb and damaging way because of gentle ribbing from other leaders it is Donald Trump. Is there a more fragile ego on the planet?
Amy Klobuchar?
Baemy does not have a fragile ego, and when you go to Iowa you'd better make sure she's not in stapler range before you repeat that slander.
Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet. Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.
The "vegan" interior was a £3k option on my Taycan. Porsche know which way the wind is blowing.
Be interesting to see if Lettuce and brocolli interiors wear as well as leather.
Comments
Nothing a Tory candidate can or will say will change enough votes to make it worthwhile.
Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject.
View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.
This is a pretty degraded election all round, but also I haven't been able to participate much because of work and church commitments, so am feeling unusually disengaged.
I'm relieved. I had a particular concern that I picked up yesterday about Labour supporters which I'll explain next Thursday
We have another hustings in Totnes called by the Greens, even though they have not put up a candidate (to help get Sarah Wollaston elected as a LibDem). Hats off to our Conservative candidate, he is going to attend. He's happy to have a civil discussion - but no doubt will be shouted down like he was by his opponents in the previous hustings.
We'll let a week Thursday show whose approach the voters prefer.
While the response will not please XR as nothing could, and a lot of the time talk is just talk, theres been so much I do think there will be some actual outcomes too. Doesnt make some of them any less irritating or seeking personal attention through histrionics though.
(actually we probably are but we have about a 12 year gap in our records so can’t prove it)
The reality is that it wasn't enough - this is where the Corbyn project is correct in its assessment. All of these "Labour Heartlands" where Labour now appears to be as toxic a brand as Thatcher ever was. Pre Thatcher they were poor and proud, they had a solid manual job, they grafted, they got by. Then Thatcher demolished the industry their jobs were founded from. Then Major and later Blair evolved the area so that their solid graft job for life was replaced by a less solid warehouse or logistics job.
In short they've gone from being poor but proud to poor with an iPad and angry. Brexit offered them a simple analysis and a simple solution to their ills. It doesn't matter that its a pack of lies. It doesn't matter that they will all be materially poorer after Brexit. They want it. They were promised it. They believe in it. Because when their own side failed to materially change their situation they were willing to believe the other side offering them a cross party cross generational solution.
When I sat unhappy in the Labour Party I used to say that I couldn't see how these voters would go Labour to Conservative. Not *these* voters. Surely. And yet reportedly (*cough* angry sacked Labour regional office staffers) a MILLION Labour leavers have gone Tory. In places like Easington. I'm not predicting that the Tories will take Easignton. But reportedly its on a knife edge, and even for that to be true is a damning indictment of everything thats wrong with politics today. Ignore people. Marginalise people. Use people as voting fodder. Lie to people. Get surprised when people rebel.
Labour collapsed in Scotland. Absolutely demolished. Don't tell me it can't happen in England as well.
i suppose 9% is ok for government
The BBC surprised me by publishing this well-balanced piece including passages from some very respected scientists and analysts who cast serious doubt on the “meat is bad for the environment” orthodoxy:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/meat_environment
A lot of the XR lot are middle-class Johnny come latelys who’ve just wanted to jump on the bandwagon, and have ended up pissing everyone off.
I’d agree that Greta Thunberg had an impact (though she risks going slightly off the boil now as she politicises) and also the BBC, particularly David Attenborough.
Things are as bad in many Tory safe seats, of course, but there is greater and more pressing need for activist politicians in left leaning areas.
I think a lot of people worry and feel guilty about the environment and give leeway to those badgering them about it. But that can turn quickly if the badgering never let's up and even increases even when actions are taken.
Edit: A quick way to make a grateful person ungrateful is to demand they be grateful, and a quick way to put people off trying to help the environment is to harass people about it when they are trying to do so.
It's a careful line to walk.
When I was in Ireland recently, they had a beautifully pragmatic view of the role of the TDs. I repeatedly heard, "Yes, he's a grand TD, he has bought a lot of Government money into North Kildare". Or Limerick. Or whatever. At least, the TDs recognized their job was to fight for their constituents.
The Welsh Labour MPs have done nothing for the South Wales valleys. Their master is the Labour party.
There is no better example than the Barnett formula. Despite the fact that this impoverishes Wales (& the North of England) relative to other regions, the South Walian Labour MPs all voted for it. It was good for Labour party unity.
I wil never forgive the Labour party for the damage it has inflicted on Wales.
The Scots showed the way. I have no doubt that the constituents in the Scottish central belt are better off with SNP MPs arguing their cause than vacuous Labour MPs, serving the interests of Labour in Westminster.
Extinction Rebellion don't want to hear that though. They are the Khmer Rouge of environmentalism, wanting to turn the clock back to Year Zero Carbon.
The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off
Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them
Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.
If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.
However, I don't think the problem is solvable - Look at Redcar exactly what could / can be done to create skilled high income jobs in an area with poor communication links (40 minutes to a motorway, 40 minutes to an airport, 30 minutes by train to a North South line). And they have already protested once by voting Lib Dem back in 2010.
Thatcherism was right in that something needed to replace the existing mining jobs but Norman Tebbit was far more accurate and brutally honest by saying you need to get on your bike.
I have paid tribute before to Rhodri Morgan and Carwyn Jones, both of whom I regard as clever and wily politicians. They helped shore up Labour's hegemony for too long, unfortunately for Wales.
Born to rule arrogance.
However a week before polling day Boris knows it will do him no harm to not be seen as Trump's poodle
I would just like to put on record that I have great reservations about Boris and in common with the vast majority I wish the choice was not between Boris or Corbyn
Corbyn is the reason I support Boris and the only reason. It is greater than Brexit for me
I hope if Boris wins he introduces more liberal policies and depending on his majority agrees a sensible FTA and the country moves the dial past 24 x 7 Brexit controversies and Corbyn is consigned to history
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18077579.online-poll-think-won-stv-leaders-debate/?ref=twtrec
PS: Cheek to call them party leaders when they are just region office managers of London parties, none of them exist as real political Scottish parties , they just steal the "Scottish" to pretend they have any Scottish content.
And, as I suggested yesterday, if these seats do return 8 or 10 new Tory MPs, they will tend towards being local councillors or local workers - the A Listers never looked at these unlikely to win seats - vide Scott Mann in the SW. Therefore, if following if, they are elected Boris need to let these MPs get on with it and give them enough money to make a real difference to the lives of these people. The Boris I have met is up for that.
I know in your ignorance you have already voted for Brexit please do not compound the problem by giving Boris Johnson a majority. Instead please vote for your left liberal woke candidate we approve of and go back to voting Labour like you usually do and then we can conveniently ignore you for the rest of the Parliament.
Yours sincerely,
Hugh Grant and other luvvies,
Islington, Hampstead etc
Anyone who cannot reason that it is unjust that 6 people should have more money than 14M people is not right in the head.
(Nice photo BTW).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50651235
The tale about the Bishop Auckland MP mixing up Ingleton in her constituency with Ingleton in Craven surely demonstrates she does not give a f**K about Bishop providing the proles continue to vote for her.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/04/08/thatcher_on_socialism_he_would_rather_the_poor_were_poorer_provided_the_rich_were_less_rich.html