I’ve lost track. How many nanoseconds since Labour’s last anti-semitism crisis?
Imagine how bad it will be once Labour Twitter has had a full day to "respond" to the Jewish Labour Movement ... shudders.
p.s. I just wanted to check whether the zero line at the right of your awesome graphs is election day itself? It looked to me like there might be a day's offset, but I could be wrong.
Zero should be election day itself.
Greats, thanks. I'm all square now - that means today is Day -7 on the chart.
Yep, and points are on the last fieldwork date for a poll.
He voted for May's BINO deal, not Brexit. He also showed contempt for his own parties election and the mandate that Johnson won, so quite right he was chucked out of the party.
The mindset capable of defining May's WA as "not Brexit" is difficult to reason with. But not, I hope, impossible. So I would ask you to please reflect on the term "Brexit". Is it not simply shorthand for the UK exiting the EU? And are there not several different ways in which that could be achieved, ranging from very close alignment to clean break? And is it not for this very reason that various qualifying adjectives such as "hard" and "soft" have evolved?
I would define Brexit as how it was defined during the EU referendum: Taking back control of our laws, money and borders [even though I couldn't care less about the last one]. Is that an unreasonable definition? Hard and soft evolved afterwards by those who lost the referendum trying to retain what they liked about the EU despite it having been rejected - there is no such thing as hard and soft, there is BINO or Brexit.
Hence the "red lines" these were all issues accepted by both sides during the referendum - we must leave the ECJ, Single Market, Customs Union, regain control of our laws, our money and our borders.
May's backstop didn't do this. In fact May's backstop was much LESS democratic than being EU members.
This is dancing on the head of a pin. Brexit is Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
At the worst end of projections there might be a period of high inflation and limited capital flight that's ok then.
It could be much worse under a no-deal or even hard Brexit.
The Tory pro-European pivot begins as soon as we're technically out. Watch this space.
Boris’s plan will be to resolve Brexit quickly inside a year, and then from 2021-2024 build domestic progress and infrastructure off the back of that economic stability of that new status quo so his electoral pitch in May 2024 will be on how he’s improved the regions, not retrospectively on the purity of his Brexit.
If he’s still up against a pseudo-Marxist Labour leader then, he’ll probably win again.
That'll be 19 years of continuous tory government. Almost certainly not what Leibniz was contemplating when he coined the phrase, 'Die beste aller möglichen Welten.'
On the other hand, today's Labour Party could be exactly what Schiller had in mind when he wrote "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens".
Down to 5 actual candidates: Biden, Buttigeig, Bernie, Baemy, Belizabeth Bwarren.
Then Steyer buying his way in and touch-and-go whether you also get Yang and Gabbard by the power of twitter.
How is Steyer getting these donors? Is he literally giving people money to then give to his campaign?
It helps if you can spend as much as you like advertising for donations, without worrying about whether it's more than you raise. Also you can rent monster mailing lists of political donors.
Old piece from July:
“Can you contribute even one dollar?” Steyer says in a presidential campaign ad running on Facebook, where he is spending thousands of dollars seeking a relative handful of $1 donations in return. “That would help a lot.”
However it does help that Steyer is quite a plausible candidate; I don't mean that there's any reason why he should win, but apart from being a billionaire, he seems like he could do fine in an election campaign, in a way that Bloomberg doesn't.
What do people think of Labour’s plan to ban MPs from having second jobs? Does it mean the cabinet will have to be in the Lords or are there going to be exceptions for the right sort of job?
My own opinion is this is the sort of thing the electorate should be able to decide, as long as everything is fully declared. What counts as a job anyway: should a writer no longer be able to write?
It's a silly idea which will deter professionals from entering Parliament even more than it does already. Most trades and professions would find it incredibly difficult to take five years out of their jobs, as they would lose currency and be unable to go back without a lot of training or re-certification later. If I took five years out of a job in IT then I'd be completely lost.
I guess that doesn't matter if your party's MPs are all former councillors and trade union activists though, who have never had a proper job to give up.
He voted for May's BINO deal, not Brexit. He also showed contempt for his own parties election and the mandate that Johnson won, so quite right he was chucked out of the party.
The mindset capable of defining May's WA as "not Brexit" is difficult to reason with. But not, I hope, impossible. So I would ask you to please reflect on the term "Brexit". Is it not simply shorthand for the UK exiting the EU? And are there not several different ways in which that could be achieved, ranging from very close alignment to clean break? And is it not for this very reason that various qualifying adjectives such as "hard" and "soft" have evolved?
I would define Brexit as how it was defined during the EU referendum: Taking back control of our laws, money and borders [even though I couldn't care less about the last one]. Is that an unreasonable definition? Hard and soft evolved afterwards by those who lost the referendum trying to retain what they liked about the EU despite it having been rejected - there is no such thing as hard and soft, there is BINO or Brexit.
Hence the "red lines" these were all issues accepted by both sides during the referendum - we must leave the ECJ, Single Market, Customs Union, regain control of our laws, our money and our borders.
May's backstop didn't do this. In fact May's backstop was much LESS democratic than being EU members.
This is dancing on the head of a pin. Brexit is Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
Yes. We've left. We're no longer a member. We can then diverge (or not) as time passes, depending on circumstances, our politics, EU politics, economic events, cultural factors etc etc. None of that is possible until we leave. Ergo leaving is the sine qua non of Brexit. It is Brexit the Event, which kicks off Brexit the Process. The 1st is on 31 Jan 2020 - but could have been on 31 Mar 2019 - and the 2nd will in a sense take forever, although the big milestone will be the FTA.
At the worst end of projections there might be a period of high inflation and limited capital flight that's ok then.
It could be much worse under a no-deal or even hard Brexit.
The Tory pro-European pivot begins as soon as we're technically out. Watch this space.
Boris’s plan will be to resolve Brexit quickly inside a year, and then from 2021-2024 build domestic progress and infrastructure off the back of that economic stability of that new status quo so his electoral pitch in May 2024 will be on how he’s improved the regions, not retrospectively on the purity of his Brexit.
If he’s still up against a pseudo-Marxist Labour leader then, he’ll probably win again.
That'll be 19 years of continuous tory government. Almost certainly not what Leibniz was contemplating when he coined the phrase, 'Die beste aller möglichen Welten.'
If you want to win, you’ll have to compromise with the electorate however much you might detest that.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The great GIN of pb knew immediately that this one was going to have major cut through.
Cummings apparently visits pubs up and down the country to understand the nation. He could save himself a lot of bother and just have a chat with our esteemed GIN.
Angela Rayner's interaction with Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard is hilarious btw. I recommend everyone watch it.
What do people think of Labour’s plan to ban MPs from having second jobs? Does it mean the cabinet will have to be in the Lords or are there going to be exceptions for the right sort of job?
My own opinion is this is the sort of thing the electorate should be able to decide, as long as everything is fully declared. What counts as a job anyway: should a writer no longer be able to write?
I would like them to reduce the number of holidays so second jobs are less practical rather than banning them. I think it is going to be around 20 weeks, perhaps a bit more, in 2019 that parliament wasnt sitting!
James Libson, a lawyer representing the Jewish Labour Movement, confirmed he has prepared 70 testimonies from current and former staffers as part of the inquiry.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The great GIN of pb knew immediately that this one was going to have major cut through.
Cummings apparently visits pubs up and down the country to understand the nation. He could save himself a lot of bother and just have a chat with our esteemed GIN.
Angela Rayner's interaction with Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard is hilarious btw. I recommend everyone watch it.
I doubt it will shift any votes, but it is quite funny that Jezza is so thick he can't even lie about watching the Queen's speech. For me though, the weirder part was when he couldn't come up with a single romantic thing he has ever done. I mean come on, that is Maybot level weirdness, everybody surely has a funny story about trying to be nice to your partner and it going all a bit wrong.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
Yes. We've left. We're no longer a member. We can then diverge (or not) as time passes, depending on circumstances, our politics, EU politics, economic events, cultural factors etc etc. None of that is possible until we leave. Ergo leaving is the sine qua non of Brexit. It is Brexit the Event, which kicks off Brexit the Process. The 1st is on 31 Jan 2020 - but could have been on 31 Mar 2019 - and the 2nd will in a sense take forever, although the big milestone will be the FTA.
Or the impact of that FTA not being agreed and ratified by 31st Dec 2020.
Given the scope of the FTA and the timescales involved it won't be BTW..
He voted for May's BINO deal, not Brexit. He also showed contempt for his own parties election and the mandate that Johnson won, so quite right he was chucked out of the party.
The mindset capable of defining May's WA as "not Brexit" is difficult to reason with. But not, I hope, impossible. So I would ask you to please reflect on the term "Brexit". Is it not simply shorthand for the UK exiting the EU? And are there not several different ways in which that could be achieved, ranging from very close alignment to clean break? And is it not for this very reason that various qualifying adjectives such as "hard" and "soft" have evolved?
I would define Brexit as how it was defined during the EU referendum: Taking back control of our laws, money and borders [even though I couldn't care less about the last one]. Is that an unreasonable definition? Hard and soft evolved afterwards by those who lost the referendum trying to retain what they liked about the EU despite it having been rejected - there is no such thing as hard and soft, there is BINO or Brexit.
Hence the "red lines" these were all issues accepted by both sides during the referendum - we must leave the ECJ, Single Market, Customs Union, regain control of our laws, our money and our borders.
May's backstop didn't do this. In fact May's backstop was much LESS democratic than being EU members.
This is dancing on the head of a pin. Brexit is Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
I think this is the best tactic for Labour should they find themselves in this position; even if people dislike Corbyn they tend to like his policies and hitting LDs and Nats over renationalisation and other lefty things are likely to benefit if they have to call another snap election in 2020. If Labour can do all the Brexit stuff at the same time, hold a second ref and implement the result either way, I think that would work well for them (and maybe if Corbyn steps down before a 2020 election due to health or somesuch, and a loyal but more acceptable face of the left wins the leadership role)...
But this is in the unlikely hung parliament territory...
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
Yes. We've left. We're no longer a member. We can then diverge (or not) as time passes, depending on circumstances, our politics, EU politics, economic events, cultural factors etc etc. None of that is possible until we leave. Ergo leaving is the sine qua non of Brexit. It is Brexit the Event, which kicks off Brexit the Process. The 1st is on 31 Jan 2020 - but could have been on 31 Mar 2019 - and the 2nd will in a sense take forever, although the big milestone will be the FTA.
I agree with you 100% if we can diverge etc like you claim. Absolutely. That is why Brexit will be "done" when we leave.
However the backstop meant we couldn't diverge. Which negates the rest of your post. And is why it was an undemocratic BINO.
The British electorate need to give Jeremy Corbyn the biggest defeat ever handed out to The Labour Party. They have been taken over by extremists with abhorrent views.
This could have been penned about Boris Johnson's and Dominic Cummings' revolutionary populists, with curious links, in their ever greater merging with the Brexit Party, to a bizarre stew of ultrarightwing and ultra-leftwing intellectual influences.
However damaging or not Corbyn's policies may be in the short-term, they may be reversible for those that want to. A hard Brexit may not.
Why?
A hard Brexit can be reversed by rejoining the EU. 22 countries have joined the EU over the years.
A Venezuelan-style catastrophe will be much more irreversible. I can't think of any country ever that has pursued Marxist policies and come back from it to where we are now - can you?
Quite.
A load of bollocks in today's FT today saying sterling is strong because investors now expect "an orderly withdrawal from the EU". NO, THAT ISNT WHY.... The pound is strong because Corbyn looks set to lose and is a mortal threat to the UK's prosperity and credit-worthiness.
Forgotten the reports from various City banks that the Conservatives, admittedly with the threat of a no-deal Brexit, would be worse (or even worse) for the economy than Labour? Or is there an election on?
I placed a sizeable bet on LibDems to win Portsmouth South at 15/8. Today I can get 33/1. Has anyone got a worse value bet then mine or indeed match my idiocy in any conceivable way?
I stuck money on Johnson to lose his seat. Great example of a bet placed with no reference whatsoever to my head. Purely about other parts of my anatomy.
He voted for May's BINO deal, not Brexit. He also showed contempt for his own parties election and the mandate that Johnson won, so quite right he was chucked out of the party.
The mindset capable of defining May's WA as "not Brexit" is difficult to reason with. But not, I hope, impossible. So I would ask you to please reflect on the term "Brexit". Is it not simply shorthand for the UK exiting the EU? And are there not several different ways in which that could be achieved, ranging from very close alignment to clean break? And is it not for this very reason that various qualifying adjectives such as "hard" and "soft" have evolved?
I would define Brexit as how it was defined during the EU referendum: Taking back control of our laws, money and borders [even though I couldn't care less about the last one]. Is that an unreasonable definition? Hard and soft evolved afterwards by those who lost the referendum trying to retain what they liked about the EU despite it having been rejected - there is no such thing as hard and soft, there is BINO or Brexit.
Hence the "red lines" these were all issues accepted by both sides during the referendum - we must leave the ECJ, Single Market, Customs Union, regain control of our laws, our money and our borders.
May's backstop didn't do this. In fact May's backstop was much LESS democratic than being EU members.
This is dancing on the head of a pin. Brexit is Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU.
And the purpose of Britain ceasing to be a member of the EU was to regain control of our laws, money and borders.
If we cease to be a member of the EU but continue to be subject to EU laws etc then have we really left?
I actually wonder if Jezza might secretly be quite relieved if he loses this GE as he won't have to stop pretending about stuff he has no interest in, dressing up smart and having the media / protesters outside his house every day. He can console himself with the fact he has moved the Labour Party much further to the left and it seems that who ever takes over will continue this.
Settle into Grand Old Man of the Labour Left. Worse ways to spend your twilight.
At the worst end of projections there might be a period of high inflation and limited capital flight that's ok then.
It could be much worse under a no-deal or even hard Brexit.
The Tory pro-European pivot begins as soon as we're technically out. Watch this space.
Boris’s plan will be to resolve Brexit quickly inside a year, and then from 2021-2024 build domestic progress and infrastructure off the back of that economic stability of that new status quo so his electoral pitch in May 2024 will be on how he’s improved the regions, not retrospectively on the purity of his Brexit.
If he’s still up against a pseudo-Marxist Labour leader then, he’ll probably win again.
That may be the plan, but I doubt it will be done in a year - and most people will expect it to be done by February, so some disappointment will come early. Then there are some goodies to be handed out but less money coming in. The new 'stability' will be at a lower level. I hope Labour move back towards the centre because the election following this one will be a landslide against the Tories.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
I think this is the best tactic for Labour should they find themselves in this position; even if people dislike Corbyn they tend to like his policies and hitting LDs and Nats over renationalisation and other lefty things are likely to benefit if they have to call another snap election in 2020. If Labour can do all the Brexit stuff at the same time, hold a second ref and implement the result either way, I think that would work well for them (and maybe if Corbyn steps down before a 2020 election due to health or somesuch, and a loyal but more acceptable face of the left wins the leadership role)...
But this is in the unlikely hung parliament territory...
Thats just angling for a second election in that situation. Nothing more.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The great GIN of pb knew immediately that this one was going to have major cut through.
Cummings apparently visits pubs up and down the country to understand the nation. He could save himself a lot of bother and just have a chat with our esteemed GIN.
Angela Rayner's interaction with Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard is hilarious btw. I recommend everyone watch it.
I doubt it will shift any votes, but it is quite funny that Jezza is so thick he can't even lie about watching the Queen's speech. For me though, the weirder part was when he couldn't come up with a single romantic thing he has ever done. I mean come on, that is Maybot level weirdness, everybody surely has a funny story about trying to be nice to your partner and it going all a bit wrong.
Shift votes - no. Feed into the narrative that the Labour campaign has hit the buffers - definitely. It also blatantly knocks Corbyn's profile as someone who is conviction-based. Why would he tell a porkie pie over something so trivial? That is weird and is not priced in with Corbyn currently. He is known for being dogmatic and probably wrong with his analysis. But most people seem to think he is honest. What a great thing to ruin your reputation on.
I find the romantic one less weird personally. Some people are private. Corbyn also has probably genuinely struggled for material there as he is just too earnest to ever by lovey-dovey. I reckon most people would think that and if he was hammered on it, he'd get the sympathy vote.
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The great GIN of pb knew immediately that this one was going to have major cut through.
Cummings apparently visits pubs up and down the country to understand the nation. He could save himself a lot of bother and just have a chat with our esteemed GIN.
Angela Rayner's interaction with Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard is hilarious btw. I recommend everyone watch it.
I doubt it will shift any votes, but it is quite funny that Jezza is so thick he can't even lie about watching the Queen's speech. For me though, the weirder part was when he couldn't come up with a single romantic thing he has ever done. I mean come on, that is Maybot level weirdness, everybody surely has a funny story about trying to be nice to your partner and it going all a bit wrong.
I remain unconvinced he was lying about the Queen's Speech. I could not answer that question without some discussion about what precisely is meant by "watching" as opposed to being in the room while it is on, some but not all years.
On romantic failure anecdotes? Does everyone have a story about this or anything? I've got friends who run companies but have no anecdotes about romance or any other subjects. People who regularly tell the same stories over and over again will have them. I'm not sure which is worse.
But I suspect the answer is more sinister. Corbyn thought it was a trap, a trick question, and was trying to figure out how, so debased has discourse become. And as you say, he is not the sharpest tool in the picnic basket.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
So why are Labour getting completely distracted by such trivia? Although to be fair, the news is now leading on a story they want to spend even less time talking about.
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
And to think back in the day, accepting a single invite for a dinner with a dodgy bloke on a yacht was enough to cause weeks of outrage and nearly finishing your political career.
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The tories responded very aggressively and petulantly in response to court decisions. The bland vagueness of the manifesto on relationship between courts and parliament and government therefore worry me a lot, as their behaviour suggests they will react in vindictive short term fashion.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
And to think back in the day, accepting a single invite for a dinner with a dodgy bloke on a yacht was enough to cause weeks of outrage and nearly finishing your political career.
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
So why are Labour getting completely distracted by such trivia? Although to be fair, the news is now leading on a story they want to spend even less time talking about.
exactly.
Jez clearly cared about the answer he gave yesterday. None of them are nimble enough thinkers to defuse it.
2 elections, north vs south. Cons win big in the 1st but lose quite badly in the 2nd due to tactical voting. Majority as expected 40/50. So to make money (starting from here) requires a clever micro approach of backing the Cons to take some very unlikely places up north/midlands but at the same time backing them to lose some crazy seats in the south. Put together a portfolio like that, individual seats, all bets at 3/1 or better. That could pay off big time.
Set against that....
The undecided vote is very easy to talk round to the Tories, I am finding. We can't reach them all personally, but if the electorate starts coming round to that view on their own next week, then those crazy bets in the south aren't coming off.
I agree with you 100% if we can diverge etc like you claim. Absolutely. That is why Brexit will be "done" when we leave.
However the backstop meant we couldn't diverge. Which negates the rest of your post. And is why it was an undemocratic BINO.
The backstop did not make it impossible to diverge over time. What the backstop did was steer heavily to close alignment in the near to medium term. It is and was fine for the more hardline leavers to argue that for this reason it was not a Brexit that they could support. Where they (and you) trip over into zealotry is pronouncing it Not Brexit. It IS Brexit. The May Deal. The Boris Deal. Both are Brexit the Event which kicks off Brexit the Process. There can be no doubt about this. It is stone cold fact.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
Of course there is - I'm a 100% monarchist Tory, and I'm pretty sure I've never watched the Queen's Christmas Speech in my life. But then I'm not running for Prime Minister, nor lying about it on camera in such an awkward way that it continues to make national news for 48 hours...
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
And to think back in the day, accepting a single invite for a dinner with a dodgy bloke on a yacht was enough to cause weeks of outrage and nearly finishing your political career.
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
Alleged by Mandelson and Rothschild...but no donation was ever made.
While at the same time Mandelson gave trade concessions worth up to £50m a year to Russia's richest man after being entertained by him on his "superyacht".
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
I know the likes of Angela Rayner think Jeremy Corbyn, in all his anti-Semitic far left glory, is the bee's knees. But even the most amazing man in the world would struggle to watch something on catch-up BEFORE it was broadcast.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
I know the likes of Angela Rayner think Jeremy Corbyn, in all his anti-Semitic far left glory, is the bee's knees. But even the most amazing man in the world would struggle to watch something on catch-up BEFORE it was broadcast.
What do you mean, he is the Messiah....he has powers no mere mortal has.
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
The undecided vote is very easy to talk round to the Tories, I am finding. We can't reach them all personally, but if the electorate starts coming round to that view on their own next week, then those crazy bets in the south aren't coming off.
In which case BIG Con win. Which is my core position. I'm looking for a clever way to add value to it without closing.
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
The tories responded very aggressively and petulantly in response to court decisions. The bland vagueness of the manifesto on relationship between courts and parliament and government therefore worry me a lot, as their behaviour suggests they will react in vindictive short term fashion.
The Tory Right will be jubilant and unstoppable if they triumph, rabid for revenge. The legal system will be first on the list for 'reform' (i.e. subject to their complete control). It's gonna get bloody.
Norwich South still devoid of any significant leafleting, canvassing or placard presence. Easy Lewis hold, tories second
Even in 1983 the Tories only just managed to win Norwich South, by about 1,700 votes IIRC.
No point in targeting Norwich South, anyone in that area should be defending Norwich North (I think Chloe will be fine) and attacking Norfolk North.
I'm not suggesting there is, although it was lib dem held 2010-2015. I'm just keeping you all updated on the lack of effort here, and the clear lack of enthusiasm for Lewis even though he will win. It suggests a wider shrug at labour. As the telegraph said there is a stench of death around them.
I placed a sizeable bet on LibDems to win Portsmouth South at 15/8. Today I can get 33/1. Has anyone got a worse value bet then mine or indeed match my idiocy in any conceivable way?
I famously had £500 quid on May taking us out of the EU by the end of March. Whilst it was an insurance bet (see previous posts and articles) I genuinely thought she'd do it.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The best reason I saw was he watches it in the morning because he spends Christmas in Venezuela....
But does he salute the screen? Does he stand up when the BBC play "God Save the Queen" on the radio? Bloody communist, if you ask me. He only nodded his head at the Cenotaph! Only nodded, I tell you!
Count me out of backing renationalising the railways and abolishing tuition fees. He doesn't salute! He only nodded!
I agree with you 100% if we can diverge etc like you claim. Absolutely. That is why Brexit will be "done" when we leave.
However the backstop meant we couldn't diverge. Which negates the rest of your post. And is why it was an undemocratic BINO.
The backstop did not make it impossible to diverge over time. What the backstop did was steer heavily to close alignment in the near to medium term. It is and was fine for the more hardline leavers to argue that for this reason it was not a Brexit that they could support. Where they (and you) trip over into zealotry is pronouncing it Not Brexit. It IS Brexit. The May Deal. The Boris Deal. Both are Brexit the Event which kicks off Brexit the Process. There can be no doubt about this. It is stone cold fact.
If we had gone into the backstop could we unilaterally set our own customs rules? If we had gone into the backstop could we unilaterally end the role of the ECJ? If we had gone into the backstop could we unilaterally stop the European Parliament passing laws that became our laws.
All of those were what we argued over and what I voted for when I voted for Brexit.
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
And to think back in the day, accepting a single invite for a dinner with a dodgy bloke on a yacht was enough to cause weeks of outrage and nearly finishing your political career.
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
Is anyone surprised by this? He commemorated a dead Jew killer long after the man murdered Jewish athletes at the Olympics. Even if you were being extremely charitable to the man, the best case for him that can be squared with the facts is that he simply does not care about even the most vile anti-Semitism.
A bit like every voter who is even semi-informed that still votes Labour.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
Evidence?
Yes, I too would enjoy that evidence. I'm not holding my breath.
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
You did say a few days before the last election Theresa May would be lucky to get 35% of the vote...
Always interested to hear things like this though in case we get a Herdson moment!
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
Evidence?
Yes, I too would enjoy that evidence. I'm not holding my breath.
I would not enjoy that evidence. I would enjoy it being wishful thinking.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The best reason I saw was he watches it in the morning because he spends Christmas in Venezuela....
But does he salute the screen? Does he stand up when the BBC play "God Save the Queen" on the radio? Bloody communist, if you ask me. He only nodded his head at the Cenotaph! Only nodded, I tell you!
Do Tories ever think how they come across?
They are not criticizing him for not watching it. They are criticizing him for lying about it and not coming clean once caught.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The best reason I saw was he watches it in the morning because he spends Christmas in Venezuela....
But does he salute the screen? Does he stand up when the BBC play "God Save the Queen" on the radio? Bloody communist, if you ask me. He only nodded his head at the Cenotaph! Only nodded, I tell you!
Am I the only one here thinking of throwing a couple of bags of sand at that price, having pretty much stayed out of the betting until now?
If I had some bags of sand I could afford to lose I would do so. 38% return in a week is pretty remarkable given the polls and that even Labour rampers here are talking about 'holding most of Labours seats' - not gaining seats.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
Of course there is - I'm a 100% monarchist Tory, and I'm pretty sure I've never watched the Queen's Christmas Speech in my life. But then I'm not running for Prime Minister, nor lying about it on camera in such an awkward way that it continues to make national news for 48 hours...
Glad to hear it. I've actually watched it a couple of times. You're not missing much. It's like a review of the year but delivered with less comedic effect than Charlie Brooker's. He should have just said that he sometimes watches it but he's usually pretty busy with constituency duties on Christmas Day so doesn't usually manage to watch it in full. It is a small thing but is of course being used against him by the absurd Tory propaganda machine that passes for the free press in this country. Oh well, I guess we will just have to put up with a few hundred thousand more hungry children in the next five years.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
Evidence?
Yes, I too would enjoy that evidence. I'm not holding my breath.
I would not enjoy that evidence. I would enjoy it being wishful thinking.
It is. It's from the same source that had the curiously specific yet weirdly inaccurate gym goers who claimed it was 'getting like 1641' over prorogation.
NEW: Jeremy Corbyn embraced hate preacher Read Salah AFTER he was found guilty of the incredibly antisemitic ‘blood libel’ slur. Salah's followers went on to kill Jews in his name. Thread: https://t.co/hbIjgSJbxKhttps://t.co/l53AlcEELw
And to think back in the day, accepting a single invite for a dinner with a dodgy bloke on a yacht was enough to cause weeks of outrage and nearly finishing your political career.
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
Is anyone surprised by this? He commemorated a dead Jew killer long after the man murdered Jewish athletes at the Olympics. Even if you were being extremely charitable to the man, the best case for him that can be squared with the facts is that he simply does not care about even the most vile anti-Semitism.
A bit like every voter who is even semi-informed that still votes Labour.
"Jew killer" is highly emotive language. It could be applied to Irgun who bombed the King David Hotel, killing 17 Jews.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
Of course there is - I'm a 100% monarchist Tory, and I'm pretty sure I've never watched the Queen's Christmas Speech in my life. But then I'm not running for Prime Minister, nor lying about it on camera in such an awkward way that it continues to make national news for 48 hours...
Glad to hear it. I've actually watched it a couple of times. You're not missing much. It's like a review of the year but delivered with less comedic effect than Charlie Brooker's. He should have just said that he sometimes watches it but he's usually pretty busy with constituency duties on Christmas Day so doesn't usually manage to watch it in full. It is a small thing but is of course being used against him by the absurd Tory propaganda machine that passes for the free press in this country. Oh well, I guess we will just have to put up with a few hundred thousand more hungry children in the next five years.
"Constituency duties on Christmas Day" !?
He should have just said "No, I spend the day with my family and loved ones" - There's not a soul in the country who would criticise him for that!
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
The best reason I saw was he watches it in the morning because he spends Christmas in Venezuela....
But does he salute the screen? Does he stand up when the BBC play "God Save the Queen" on the radio? Bloody communist, if you ask me. He only nodded his head at the Cenotaph! Only nodded, I tell you!
Do Tories ever think how they come across?
They are not criticizing him for not watching it. They are criticizing him for lying about it and not coming clean once caught.
With both parties pledging to recruit many tens of thousands of police, teachers and nurses, and the UK having low unemployment and demographics getting older and older with fewer people of working age, why is no-one linking this back to migration?
I am going to upset a lot of posters here, actually Labour are picking up HERE in the North Midlands, with a week to go they could hold most of their seats, Stoke North included!
If true, this is an important observation. But it goes against the weight of polling, modelling and anecdotes. Given that, may I ask you for some evidence of your assertion please? If evidence is not available, then at least an explanation of your rationale.
In my area which is a LD/Con marginal it looks as though the LDs have given up.on Sutton and Cheam and are pouring resource in to shore up Tom Brake. It's always close here ..will be the same.again next week
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
Of course there is - I'm a 100% monarchist Tory, and I'm pretty sure I've never watched the Queen's Christmas Speech in my life. But then I'm not running for Prime Minister, nor lying about it on camera in such an awkward way that it continues to make national news for 48 hours...
Glad to hear it. I've actually watched it a couple of times. You're not missing much. It's like a review of the year but delivered with less comedic effect than Charlie Brooker's. He should have just said that he sometimes watches it but he's usually pretty busy with constituency duties on Christmas Day so doesn't usually manage to watch it in full. It is a small thing but is of course being used against him by the absurd Tory propaganda machine that passes for the free press in this country. Oh well, I guess we will just have to put up with a few hundred thousand more hungry children in the next five years.
"Constituency duties on Christmas Day" !?
He should have just said "No, I spend the day with my family and loved ones" - There's not a soul in the country who would criticise him for that!
Precisely. Hes a complete goober. He thinks every question might have hidden booby traps
The tories responded very aggressively and petulantly in response to court decisions. The bland vagueness of the manifesto on relationship between courts and parliament and government therefore worry me a lot, as their behaviour suggests they will react in vindictive short term fashion.
The Tory Right will be jubilant and unstoppable if they triumph, rabid for revenge. The legal system will be first on the list for 'reform' (i.e. subject to their complete control). It's gonna get bloody.
She claimed: 'He might watch it on catch up, some of us do, some of us have dinner at different times. I don't necessarily think that means that he has lied.' Ms Rayner then vehemently insisted the Labour leader had actually said he catches up with the speech on Boxing Day morning, causing host Susanna Reid to challenge her.
But it's the kind of trivia that speaks to the character of the people involved. And a lot of monarchist, traditionalist, Christmas-loving Labour Leavers might just notice and think "What a bloody weirdo"...
There's a lot more to Christmas than the Queen's Speech. At least there is in our house!
Of course there is - I'm a 100% monarchist Tory, and I'm pretty sure I've never watched the Queen's Christmas Speech in my life. But then I'm not running for Prime Minister, nor lying about it on camera in such an awkward way that it continues to make national news for 48 hours...
Glad to hear it. I've actually watched it a couple of times. You're not missing much. It's like a review of the year but delivered with less comedic effect than Charlie Brooker's. He should have just said that he sometimes watches it but he's usually pretty busy with constituency duties on Christmas Day so doesn't usually manage to watch it in full. It is a small thing but is of course being used against him by the absurd Tory propaganda machine that passes for the free press in this country. Oh well, I guess we will just have to put up with a few hundred thousand more hungry children in the next five years.
"Constituency duties on Christmas Day" !?
He should have just said "No, I spend the day with my family and loved ones" - There's not a soul in the country who would criticise him for that!
Precisely. Hes a complete goober. He thinks every question might have hidden booby traps
Yeah I wonder how he could have got that impression. The press usually gives Labour leaders such an easy ride.
If SC judges start taking decisions on key constitutional and political matters it will be no surprise if the Lord Chancellor of the Government of the day starts to appoint judges more in line with the views of the governing party
Comments
Vote BP get the Tories for those Labour Leavers who would never vote Tory is a bit of an own goal .
Old piece from July: However it does help that Steyer is quite a plausible candidate; I don't mean that there's any reason why he should win, but apart from being a billionaire, he seems like he could do fine in an election campaign, in a way that Bloomberg doesn't.
I guess that doesn't matter if your party's MPs are all former councillors and trade union activists though, who have never had a proper job to give up.
A rose by any other name . . .
Cummings apparently visits pubs up and down the country to understand the nation. He could save himself a lot of bother and just have a chat with our esteemed GIN.
Angela Rayner's interaction with Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard is hilarious btw. I recommend everyone watch it.
Has everyone just given up on this election?
FT exclusive: shadow chancellor rules out pact and dares others to vote down policies"
https://www.ft.com
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/05/seventy-labour-staffers-give-statements-to-antisemitism-inquiry
I presume Maomentum will claim they are all Zionist entryists in cahoots with Israel or whatever nonsense they tried after the Panorama programme.
Given the scope of the FTA and the timescales involved it won't be BTW..
Lab 4/7
Con 3/1
LD 20/1
But this is in the unlikely hung parliament territory...
However the backstop meant we couldn't diverge. Which negates the rest of your post. And is why it was an undemocratic BINO.
What would be the Tory majority if there was a 15.2% swing across the country?
Then there are some goodies to be handed out but less money coming in. The new 'stability' will be at a lower level.
I hope Labour move back towards the centre because the election following this one will be a landslide against the Tories.
I find the romantic one less weird personally. Some people are private. Corbyn also has probably genuinely struggled for material there as he is just too earnest to ever by lovey-dovey. I reckon most people would think that and if he was hammered on it, he'd get the sympathy vote.
On romantic failure anecdotes? Does everyone have a story about this or anything? I've got friends who run companies but have no anecdotes about romance or any other subjects. People who regularly tell the same stories over and over again will have them. I'm not sure which is worse.
But I suspect the answer is more sinister. Corbyn thought it was a trap, a trick question, and was trying to figure out how, so debased has discourse become. And as you say, he is not the sharpest tool in the picnic basket.
So after 9 years of austerity that’s it.
Although to be fair, the news is now leading on a story they want to spend even less time talking about.
Perhaps there is a strategy after all..
In the same month...Guardian published an op-ed from the same bloke.
Britain's duty to the Palestinian people - Raed Salah
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/19/britain-duty-to-palestinian-people
[Boris] doesn't get home until around 10:30pm –- at which point he unwinds by doing “a few quadratic equations, and a bit of Greek lyric poetry. Nothing complicated."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/survive-16-hour-work-day-like-boris-johnson/
Jez clearly cared about the answer he gave yesterday. None of them are nimble enough thinkers to defuse it.
The undecided vote is very easy to talk round to the Tories, I am finding. We can't reach them all personally, but if the electorate starts coming round to that view on their own next week, then those crazy bets in the south aren't coming off.
Might be a delay here guys, looks like a recount in Houghton and in Sunderland Central
While at the same time Mandelson gave trade concessions worth up to £50m a year to Russia's richest man after being entertained by him on his "superyacht".
Count me out of backing renationalising the railways and abolishing tuition fees. He doesn't salute! He only nodded!
Do Tories ever think how they come across?
If we had gone into the backstop could we unilaterally end the role of the ECJ?
If we had gone into the backstop could we unilaterally stop the European Parliament passing laws that became our laws.
All of those were what we argued over and what I voted for when I voted for Brexit.
A bit like every voter who is even semi-informed that still votes Labour.
This is a non-story but why did Corbyn feel the need to lie?
Always interested to hear things like this though in case we get a Herdson moment!
Am I the only one here thinking of throwing a couple of bags of sand at that price, having pretty much stayed out of the betting until now?
He should have just said "No, I spend the day with my family and loved ones" - There's not a soul in the country who would criticise him for that!
It's always close here ..will be the same.again next week