I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
We turned it off and have put on the Muppets Christmas Carol.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?
Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.
Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?
It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose
It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?
Yes, unambiguously. In the same sense that Macmillanites were actually Conservatives, then Thatcherites were actually Conservatives, then Cameron's Liberal Conservatives were actually Conservatives, then Boris's New Populist Conservatives are actually Conservatives.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Surely not, the Queen is on in the morning according to Labour's biggest all-time election loser.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
That parable about the dreadful miser eventually repenting - it’s just not woke enough .
Won’t be surprised if there is no happy ending and Scrooge simply is told he can never make up for his colonial past and is therefore cancelled on Twitter.
Yes I was thinking that. This Scrooge is irredeemable. Dickens didn’t write him as a murderer. He was just nasty enough whilst being worth saving. But then what did Dickens know about this story?
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?
Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.
Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?
It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose
It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?
Yes, unambiguously. In the same sense that Macmillanites were actually Conservatives, then Thatcherites were actually Conservatives, then Cameron's Liberal Conservatives were actually Conservatives, then Boris's New Populist Conservatives are actually Conservatives.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
I see it more like a dung beetle, picking up more and more bits, and losing a few bits here and there too. Thatcher has not been forgotten, and much of what Boris does will apply her principles. But they will not be applied universally. Disraeli, Macmillan, Palmerston, Heath, are all still with us in some form.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?
Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.
Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?
It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose
It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?
Yes, unambiguously. In the same sense that Macmillanites were actually Conservatives, then Thatcherites were actually Conservatives, then Cameron's Liberal Conservatives were actually Conservatives, then Boris's New Populist Conservatives are actually Conservatives.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
Yes I agree. But if someone aligns with a particular version, say because they are a fanboy of the leader, then actively undermines the next iteration, are they actually a Consevative? I'm not sure, I think maybe they are just fanboys.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Surely not, the Queen is on in the morning according to Labour's biggest all-time election loser.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?
Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.
Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?
It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose
It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?
Yes, unambiguously. In the same sense that Macmillanites were actually Conservatives, then Thatcherites were actually Conservatives, then Cameron's Liberal Conservatives were actually Conservatives, then Boris's New Populist Conservatives are actually Conservatives.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
I see it more like a dung beetle...
...and now I have to wipe the raspberry Pepsi Max from my keyboard.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
You mean like William Hague destroyed Tony Blair?
Boris Johnson is nowhere near as popular as Tony Blair in 1997-2001 plus as a former DPP Sir Keir Starmer QC starts with a lot more credibility than Hague.
Are you a Conservative or just a Dave Cameron fanboy?
It's become kind of hard for Cameron fans to venerate his majority as the pinnacle of Conservative success now that's it's been replaced by one 8 times as large. The well-informed should have known that Balliol was always going to beat Brasenose
It's painful but I'm sure they will figure out a clever line to take soon. But going back to the question, are they actually Conservatives?
Yes, unambiguously. In the same sense that Macmillanites were actually Conservatives, then Thatcherites were actually Conservatives, then Cameron's Liberal Conservatives were actually Conservatives, then Boris's New Populist Conservatives are actually Conservatives.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
Yes I agree. But if someone aligns with a particular version, say because they are a fanboy of the leader, then actively undermines the next iteration, are they actually a Consevative? I'm not sure, I think maybe they are just fanboys.
I agree that it's deeply irritating, although in fairness undermining the next iteration is itself a venerable Conservative traditition...
The online betting company whose boss paid herself £323 million last year has been accused of making money by using data modelling to limit winning customers’ ability to bet.
A former employee of Bet365 has said that the company uses “backdoor algorithms” to identify accounts that threaten its profits and blocks them or limits the stakes they can bet to limit their potential winnings.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
I recently saw almost all the Carry On films - gods they got hornier and hornier as the years went on.
I was going to comment further on the previous thread on why Johnson's record on homelessness was so dire as Mayor of London. It fits the theme of this header. I don't think Johnson is actually callous. People like Rees-Mogg fill that role. Johnson is snake oil rather than snake. He wants people to be happy. Johnson thinks, I make a pledge, repeat a snappy soundbite, get a photo op - job done!
If you are the mayor of a city and want to do something about homelessness, you need to understand why people are homeless, get the various agencies working to a plan, knock heads together and follow up. Johnson did none of these things and so he wasted large amounts of money .and opportunity not dealing with homelessness.
It will be the same with Brexit and the other things he deals with as prime minister.
He can't resist a chance to don a pinny can he? Shoot me, but it's endearing.
A politician who has shown very little interest in homelessness over a long career gets a photo-op with his oligarch friend at a homeless shelter.
You do not like Boris but to be fair he has hit the right notes with his address to our British Jews and the homeless. It is Christmas, and maybe time to be joyful rather than cynical
I think I am pretty factual. It clearly is a photo-op and actually he has shown little interest in homelessness compared with other politicians. He did run a couple of half-hearted schemes when he was Mayor of London, for an area that was a key part of his remit. Homelessness in London rose very substantially on his watch and he didn't show much concern to do anything meaningful about it.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
I recently saw almost all the Carry On films - gods they got hornier and hornier as the years went on.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
Still hilarious though
The French Revolution one is another great - and with a socialist woke message.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Quite agree...my favourite 'Carry on' film.
Carry on up the Khyber is one of my favourites. Obviously would now be banned for cultural appropriation and blacking up.
Still hilarious though
The French Revolution one is another great - and with a socialist woke message.
The online betting company whose boss paid herself £323 million last year has been accused of making money by using data modelling to limit winning customers’ ability to bet.
A former employee of Bet365 has said that the company uses “backdoor algorithms” to identify accounts that threaten its profits and blocks them or limits the stakes they can bet to limit their potential winnings.
This is brand new information!
While I find it frustrating when I get banned or limited to paltry sums, I don't resent the betting companies doing so. Customers get to choose whether to make bets or not; betting companies should be able to do so too AFAIAC. If they didn't, well, there wouldn't be much of a gambling industry left.
The online betting company whose boss paid herself £323 million last year has been accused of making money by using data modelling to limit winning customers’ ability to bet.
A former employee of Bet365 has said that the company uses “backdoor algorithms” to identify accounts that threaten its profits and blocks them or limits the stakes they can bet to limit their potential winnings.
This is brand new information!
If only there was a PBer who used to be very senior at Bet365...
The online betting company whose boss paid herself £323 million last year has been accused of making money by using data modelling to limit winning customers’ ability to bet.
A former employee of Bet365 has said that the company uses “backdoor algorithms” to identify accounts that threaten its profits and blocks them or limits the stakes they can bet to limit their potential winnings.
This is brand new information!
If only there was a PBer who used to be very senior at Bet365...
Indeed. Preferably one in the lower echelons of British political power with good future prospects. Where would we find such a paragon...
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Carry on Abroad is in my top 10 films. I think the whole lot are on over Christmas.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Carry on Abroad is in my top 10 films. I think the whole lot are on over Christmas.
The Muppet Christmas Carol not far behind!
Carry on Brexit is on.
Sid James plays a natural Johnson, only surpassed by Charles Hawtreys Phwarrbyn.
You can’t help but feel that Barbara Windsor was miscast as Terry May.
I've no idea what this is supposed to be on BBC1 but it certainly isn't Dickens.
It's garbage tbh.
As I posted earlier. What a frigging disaster. What the hell are the BBC thinking?
If you are going to push the artistic envelope to the point where it is too big for the letterbox, at least get the sound levels right and stop the actors muttering to no one in particular.
I seem to recall some other BBC series in recent years with really bound sound levels, is it some new hip trend? It reminds me of reading a book recently which had no speech marks, and being informed that that is genuinely also a new trend, despite it making it much harder to read. I hope whoever told me that was lying, although it did make me feel like a grumpy old man.
I'm biased as no one can improve on the Alistair Sim version as far as I am concerned.
The musical version is on this Christmas, but no version can surpass The Muppet Christmas Carol.
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
Carry on Abroad is in my top 10 films. I think the whole lot are on over Christmas.
The Muppet Christmas Carol not far behind!
Carry on Brexit is on.
Sid James plays a natural Johnson, only surpassed by Charles Hawtreys Phwarrbyn.
You can’t help but feel that Barbara Windsor was miscast as Terry May.
If I were a critic of the Tories I’d say the GE verdict was Carry on Muppets!
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
Incredible that not one Islamic country gives a toss about this.
Well we do ignore oppression of Christian churches in South & South East Asia and the Middle East. Plus we were hardly quick off the mark for the Jewish Holocaust, now were we?
Well we do ignore oppression of Christian churches in South & South East Asia and the Middle East. Plus we were hardly quick off the mark for the Jewish Holocaust, now were we?
I think the Hong Kong Chinese should be first in line. They should assimilate well and would be a boon to our economy - they are educated and often English-speaking. Also we have an obligation to them for obvious historical reasons that we don't have to the Uighurs.
If he offers that lady from Pakistan a safe haven, it will be a little more than words, though heaven knows she won't accept it now.
One of the best ways for the Tories to show they want Britain to be an internationalist global power post-Brexit would be to offer asylum for those fleeing religious and political persecution faster and quicker than anyone else.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
Given that estimates of the number of Uighur Muslims held in Chinese internment camps range from 800,000 to 3,000,000, wherein they are subject to torture, rape and medical experimentation, such a policy might not produce the counter-Islamist outcome you predict.
I was going to comment further on the previous thread on why Johnson's record on homelessness was so dire as Mayor of London. It fits the theme of this header. I don't think Johnson is actually callous. People like Rees-Mogg fill that role. Johnson is snake oil rather than snake. He wants people to be happy. Johnson thinks, I make a pledge, repeat a snappy soundbite, get a photo op - job done!
If you are the mayor of a city and want to do something about homelessness, you need to understand why people are homeless, get the various agencies working to a plan, knock heads together and follow up. Johnson did none of these things and so he wasted large amounts of money .and opportunity not dealing with homelessness.
It will be the same with Brexit and the other things he deals with as prime minister.
He can't resist a chance to don a pinny can he? Shoot me, but it's endearing.
A politician who has shown very little interest in homelessness over a long career gets a photo-op with his oligarch friend at a homeless shelter.
You do not like Boris but to be fair he has hit the right notes with his address to our British Jews and the homeless. It is Christmas, and maybe time to be joyful rather than cynical
I think I am pretty factual. It clearly is a photo-op and actually he has shown little interest in homelessness compared with other politicians. He did run a couple of half-hearted schemes when he was Mayor of London, for an area that was a key part of his remit. Homelessness in London rose very substantially on his watch and he didn't show much concern to do anything meaningful about it.
So Khan , by your reasoning is responsible for all the murders?
I know it is not really fair to think so, but I cannot but feel a little that people who deliberately go for the deputy job are lacking in vision or ambition. Particularly when they don't know who will be leader, and who is leader is a rather significant factor in what the deputy leader can and should do.
Eh, can be a launching pad for a long-term ambitious type I think.
Really? Here is a list of deputy leaders of the Labour Party:
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
While obviously Johnson is father of so many as to be uncountable, Father of the Nation is a bit of a stretch, even amongst other autocrats. He is widely disliked, only rescued by Corbyn being even less liked.
It is a bit early for forecasting the 2024 GE. Let's see what happens first.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
I’ve heard some spin in my time, but The Times reporting Johnson’s plan for a holiday in the Caribbean over the New Year as “an early sign of the Govt’s plan to end austerity” must be up there!
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
In fairness, nine years into government mostly without a majority, riven with splits, facing significant economic pressures and with an untested leadership, they have just won a majority of 80, the second highest number of votes ever recorded at a general election and have reduced Labour to a smoking ruin and stripped it of its longstanding hegemony in the North.
That is some achievement.
Where they are going wrong is in thinking that this was due to their brilliance, not to the weaknesses of their opponents and a very particular set of circumstances around policy.
If they can work this out, they might well be in power until the 2030s. If they can’t, then they might only have five years.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
How else would you describe thrashing Corbyn and his cronies, it is a great feeling mixed with relief that Corbyn will never be PM. I am in no way cocky, just exultant that Corbyn was thrashed decisively(boy that sounds good). As a Remainer, I worry about Boris and Brexit, but he may yet surprise us all. We shall see..
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
How else would you describe thrashing Corbyn and his cronies, it is a great feeling mixed with relief that Corbyn will never be PM. I am in no way cocky, just exultant that Corbyn was thrashed decisively(boy that sounds good). As a Remainer, I worry about Boris and Brexit, but he may yet surprise us all. We shall see..
The way you’re repeating it, it sounds positively sadistic, especially given @Jonathan’s repeated reference to cocks.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
I was going to comment further on the previous thread on why Johnson's record on homelessness was so dire as Mayor of London. It fits the theme of this header. I don't think Johnson is actually callous. People like Rees-Mogg fill that role. Johnson is snake oil rather than snake. He wants people to be happy. Johnson thinks, I make a pledge, repeat a snappy soundbite, get a photo op - job done!
If you are the mayor of a city and want to do something about homelessness, you need to understand why people are homeless, get the various agencies working to a plan, knock heads together and follow up. Johnson did none of these things and so he wasted large amounts of money .and opportunity not dealing with homelessness.
It will be the same with Brexit and the other things he deals with as prime minister.
He can't resist a chance to don a pinny can he? Shoot me, but it's endearing.
A politician who has shown very little interest in homelessness over a long career gets a photo-op with his oligarch friend at a homeless shelter.
You do not like Boris but to be fair he has hit the right notes with his address to our British Jews and the homeless. It is Christmas, and maybe time to be joyful rather than cynical
I think I am pretty factual. It clearly is a photo-op and actually he has shown little interest in homelessness compared with other politicians. He did run a couple of half-hearted schemes when he was Mayor of London, for an area that was a key part of his remit. Homelessness in London rose very substantially on his watch and he didn't show much concern to do anything meaningful about it.
So Khan , by your reasoning is responsible for all the murders?
I mean Johnson claimed at both his mayoral elections that he would get rid of homelessness in London, wasted a sizeable budget given to him for this purpose by central government, due to poor execution. Johnson's lack of interest in the project beyond the slogan and the photo op might have something to do with this.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
Interesting header as always by Tomas. The thread, not so much - cockiness is not so much repellent as a waste of time. We'll see how it works out, eh?
I'm off for a few days with family. Have a lovely Christmas, everyone.
I was going to comment further on the previous thread on why Johnson's record on homelessness was so dire as Mayor of London. It fits the theme of this header. I don't think Johnson is actually callous. People like Rees-Mogg fill that role. Johnson is snake oil rather than snake. He wants people to be happy. Johnson thinks, I make a pledge, repeat a snappy soundbite, get a photo op - job done!
If you are the mayor of a city and want to do something about homelessness, you need to understand why people are homeless, get the various agencies working to a plan, knock heads together and follow up. Johnson did none of these things and so he wasted large amounts of money .and opportunity not dealing with homelessness.
It will be the same with Brexit and the other things he deals with as prime minister.
He can't resist a chance to don a pinny can he? Shoot me, but it's endearing.
A politician who has shown very little interest in homelessness over a long career gets a photo-op with his oligarch friend at a homeless shelter.
You do not like Boris but to be fair he has hit the right notes with his address to our British Jews and the homeless. It is Christmas, and maybe time to be joyful rather than cynical
I think I am pretty factual. It clearly is a photo-op and actually he has shown little interest in homelessness compared with other politicians. He did run a couple of half-hearted schemes when he was Mayor of London, for an area that was a key part of his remit. Homelessness in London rose very substantially on his watch and he didn't show much concern to do anything meaningful about it.
So Khan , by your reasoning is responsible for all the murders?
I mean Johnson claimed at both his mayoral elections that he would get rid of homelessness in London, wasted a sizeable budget given to him for this purpose by central government, due to poor execution. Johnson's lack of interest in the project beyond the slogan and the photo op might have something to do with this.
Meanwhile, homelessness got a lot worse.
Long winded way of saying yeah but no but yeah but no...
I know it is not really fair to think so, but I cannot but feel a little that people who deliberately go for the deputy job are lacking in vision or ambition. Particularly when they don't know who will be leader, and who is leader is a rather significant factor in what the deputy leader can and should do.
Eh, can be a launching pad for a long-term ambitious type I think.
Really? Here is a list of deputy leaders of the Labour Party:
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
I think Corbyn and his cronies will need to be thrashed, decisively, several more times before they get the message.
At the moment they are off, sulking. Working out who else to blame. Doubling down on disaster.
I suspect next time quite a few more will want to join in the decisive thrashing, to drive the point home.
Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.
Is the human rights act bad?
Yes. We have always been a leader in pushing the human rights agenda (that sounds horrible but I mean it in a good way).
The Hunan Rights Act required our courts to look to Strasbourg. Not only does that create sovereignty issues, but it is also a court on which some of the judges are politically appointed and with different standards of jurisprudence and legal traditions.
We should be proud of our courts and empower them.
If Labour had gone down the route of passing the WA and advocating a soft path in the trade negotiations, I reckon they'd have held the north. London would have seen almighty swings to the Lib Dems but most of those seats are non Tory anyway.
Just had a quick peek at the new, larger constituencies in Scotland. I had thought that it would be the Tories that would suffer most, but am surprised to note that it is actually the Scottish Liberal Democrats who get thoroughly hammered, losing all three of their mainland seats. Scottish Labour also lose their only seat. Tories and SNP largely unaffected, losing one seat each.
There will be far fewer marginals if and when these new, larger constituencies are introduced. The main battleground will likely switch to Fife and Lothian (including Edinburgh).
Boundaries not set in stone yet of course, but if the SLDs haven’t already profoundly regretted their coalition years with the Tories, this could well be the final wake-up call. If they get a better candidate they might just be able to hold the new, much larger Edinburgh West, but the new Fife NE takes in so many SNP/Lab areas that it looks hopeless for the Lib Dems. The new East Dunbartonshire is even worse due to the seat taking in areas with pretty much zero SLD support.
All this assumes that the Union still exists in five years time.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
I think Corbyn and his cronies will need to be thrashed, decisively, several more times before they get the message.
At the moment they are off, sulking. Working out who else to blame. Doubling down on disaster.
I suspect next time quite a few more will want to join in the decisive thrashing, to drive the point home.
I know it is not really fair to think so, but I cannot but feel a little that people who deliberately go for the deputy job are lacking in vision or ambition. Particularly when they don't know who will be leader, and who is leader is a rather significant factor in what the deputy leader can and should do.
Eh, can be a launching pad for a long-term ambitious type I think.
Really? Here is a list of deputy leaders of the Labour Party:
Since 1931, just two have gone on to be full time leader - Attlee and Foot. For the rest, it has proved the pinnacle of their career.
Not perhaps the best of launchpads.
Iirc only a couple of home secretaries have become PM in the modern era. Don't think aimong to be home secretary shows a lack of ambition.
You remember wrongly. Only one has - Theresa May in 2016. Admittedly Churchill and Callaghan had spells at the Home Office, but that was a long time before they became PM.
For that reason, ambitious politicians did indeed try to avoid the Home Office.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
I think Corbyn and his cronies will need to be thrashed, decisively, several more times before they get the message.
At the moment they are off, sulking. Working out who else to blame. Doubling down on disaster.
I suspect next time quite a few more will want to join in the decisive thrashing, to drive the point home.
Keir Starmer is a big defender of the Human Rights Act. I don't like him already.
Is the human rights act bad?
Yes. We have always been a leader in pushing the human rights agenda (that sounds horrible but I mean it in a good way).
The Hunan Rights Act required our courts to look to Strasbourg. Not only does that create sovereignty issues, but it is also a court on which some of the judges are politically appointed and with different standards of jurisprudence and legal traditions.
We should be proud of our courts and empower them.
I mean it's an ok restaurant but I didn't realise Hunan had its own act.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
Time to give PB a rest for a while. I can't stand this Tory triumphalism which seems to be going on and on. I may return when the PB Tories have stopped parading their erections to the world!
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
I think Corbyn and his cronies will need to be thrashed, decisively, several more times before they get the message.
At the moment they are off, sulking. Working out who else to blame. Doubling down on disaster.
I suspect next time quite a few more will want to join in the decisive thrashing, to drive the point home.
That's why Labour should go for Sir Keir Starmer QC, he will forensically destroy Boris Johnson on a regular basis.
And then lose to him in 2024
It all depend on so many things. Boris has every chance of promoting himself as a competent avuncular father of the nation. He then runs in 2024 as the "why spoil it candidate". In that case no-one no matter how good has much of a chance at doing better than holding the situation. Anyone less than good will be in danger of greater losses - ironically the election leaves the Tories with more "low hanging fruit". "Look at Redcar, look at Bishop, look at Darlington - we can have a decent MP as well in Hartlepool etc" - likewise Leigh and dozens of others.
The Tories at the moment remind me of the Tories of 92 and 15 and Labour of 05, supremely cocky.
Its not surprising having just thrashed Corbyn and his cronies, decisively . Things will settle down as we get into the nitty gritty of politics. Boris must use his majority wisely. We shall see if he can.
It sounds so good, I want to say it again.. having thrashed Corbyn and his cronies decisively...
You see what I mean, cocky.
We’ve just won an eighty majority and set off a civil war in the opposition. There’s a lot to be cocky about.
Time to give PB a rest for a while. I can't stand this Tory triumphalism which seems to be going on and on. I may return when the PB Tories have stopped parading their erections to the world!
The largest cock up on display right now is in fairness Labour.
Comments
I see that "Carry on at Your Convenience" is up against the Queen on Christmas Day. The most underrated film of the series. True genius and a look at pre Br-entry Britain.
The British Conservative Party is tribal, NOT principle-based. @HYUFD is exactly right on this. The point is to seize power and hold on to it, and if that means adapting policies that are the exact opposite of the previous incarnation, then that is not a problem. If Boris was standing in 1979, he'd be James Callaghan not Margaret Thatcher.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1209225478537646080
3) Finney
2) Sim
1) Caine
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/betting-firm-boss-earns-323m-a-year-by-blocking-big-winners-dfnbgd9p7
Gremlins.
A former employee of Bet365 has said that the company uses “backdoor algorithms” to identify accounts that threaten its profits and blocks them or limits the stakes they can bet to limit their potential winnings.
This is brand new information!
If you are the mayor of a city and want to do something about homelessness, you need to understand why people are homeless, get the various agencies working to a plan, knock heads together and follow up. Johnson did none of these things and so he wasted large amounts of money .and opportunity not dealing with homelessness.
It will be the same with Brexit and the other things he deals with as prime minister. I think I am pretty factual. It clearly is a photo-op and actually he has shown little interest in homelessness compared with other politicians. He did run a couple of half-hearted schemes when he was Mayor of London, for an area that was a key part of his remit. Homelessness in London rose very substantially on his watch and he didn't show much concern to do anything meaningful about it.
They surely did.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/23/boris-johnson-will-highlight-plight-persecuted-christians-across/
There's more chance in Stalin becoming the next leader of Germany....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carry_On_Christmas_Specials
Kenneth Williams as Hands Grubbier stole the show.
The Muppet Christmas Carol not far behind!
Sid James plays a natural Johnson, only surpassed by Charles Hawtreys Phwarrbyn.
You can’t help but feel that Barbara Windsor was miscast as Terry May.
Wilfrid Brambell plays Jezza Corbyn.
Given most of the religiously persecuted come from Muslim countries it would also strengthen the demographics in this country that stand up against rising Islamism.
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-a-million-people-are-jailed-at-china-s-gulags-i-escaped-here-s-what-goes-on-inside-1.7994216
https://time.com/5467628/china-uighur-congress-torture/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps
Nandy was just on R4 laying into Labour’s “review”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_leader_of_the_Labour_Party_(UK)
Since 1931, just two have gone on to be full time leader - Attlee and Foot. For the rest, it has proved the pinnacle of their career.
Not perhaps the best of launchpads.
It is a bit early for forecasting the 2024 GE. Let's see what happens first.
That is some achievement.
Where they are going wrong is in thinking that this was due to their brilliance, not to the weaknesses of their opponents and a very particular set of circumstances around policy.
If they can work this out, they might well be in power until the 2030s. If they can’t, then they might only have five years.
I’ve just never seen any evidence of competence.
I am in no way cocky, just exultant that Corbyn was thrashed decisively(boy that sounds good). As a Remainer, I worry about Boris and Brexit, but he may yet surprise us all. We shall see..
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
Meanwhile, homelessness got a lot worse.
I'm off for a few days with family. Have a lovely Christmas, everyone.
At the moment they are off, sulking. Working out who else to blame. Doubling down on disaster.
I suspect next time quite a few more will want to join in the decisive thrashing, to drive the point home.
Hull, Doncaster, Coventry, Chesterfield, Halifax, Sunderland.....
The Hunan Rights Act required our courts to look to Strasbourg. Not only does that create sovereignty issues, but it is also a court on which some of the judges are politically appointed and with different standards of jurisprudence and legal traditions.
We should be proud of our courts and empower them.
There will be far fewer marginals if and when these new, larger constituencies are introduced. The main battleground will likely switch to Fife and Lothian (including Edinburgh).
Boundaries not set in stone yet of course, but if the SLDs haven’t already profoundly regretted their coalition years with the Tories, this could well be the final wake-up call. If they get a better candidate they might just be able to hold the new, much larger Edinburgh West, but the new Fife NE takes in so many SNP/Lab areas that it looks hopeless for the Lib Dems. The new East Dunbartonshire is even worse due to the seat taking in areas with pretty much zero SLD support.
All this assumes that the Union still exists in five years time.
For that reason, ambitious politicians did indeed try to avoid the Home Office.
She should be applauded