Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Undefined discussion subject.

2456

Comments

  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,359

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Tears of laughter, more like it! Literally the most deluded Corbyn booster who told us Boris was completely doomed before the election is now 100% certain that Boris is ... completely doomed. Wrong before, wrong again.
    Nah, Johnson will be gutted CHB doesn't rate him. As we speak Johnson is formulating a policy to bring CHB on board.
    He would be useful, making ridiculous predictions whilst pretending to be new at the job... like on here..πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰

  • Options
    I think some new attacks on me need to be found other than thinking Johnson wouldn't win the election. You gotta move on, that was months ago.

    I even changed my name to IncorrectHorseBattery
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Tears of laughter, more like it! Literally the most deluded Corbyn booster who told us Boris was completely doomed before the election is now 100% certain that Boris is ... completely doomed. Wrong before, wrong again.
    Nah, Johnson will be gutted CHB doesn't rate him. As we speak Johnson is formulating a policy to bring CHB on board.
    I think you're right, after all - if the CHB demographic can be swung next time, then Islington North and Bootle will finally be within the Tory grasp... :wink:
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Tears of laughter, more like it! Literally the most deluded Corbyn booster who told us Boris was completely doomed before the election is now 100% certain that Boris is ... completely doomed. Wrong before, wrong again.
    Nah, Johnson will be gutted CHB doesn't rate him. As we speak Johnson is formulating a policy to bring CHB on board.
    He would be useful, making ridiculous predictions whilst pretending to be new at the job... like on here..πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰πŸ˜‰

    You need to get some new material
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798
    edited August 2020
    malcolmg said:

    kle4 said:

    They had better hope they had a really good reason. Even a middling reason would not prevent a furore, only a really good one.
    So the police should be scared to stop certain people now in case it is not politically correct, no wonder the UK is seen as a failed banana republic. What next.
    I said nothing of the kind, and your repetitive denunciation of anything and everything to do with the UK is so reflexive it is very far from convincing. No country on this planet, not even North Korea, is as bad as your pretend the UK is. It's not persuasive, it's not true, and it's sad, malc. Why feel the need to pretend so?

    I have no issue with the police stopping anyone if they have a good reason. I merely noted that they will face a firestorm over it. That's not saying they should be afraid to, it is just a fact that it will cause a ruckus, so of course they will have to hope they are indeed in the right.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Like the rest of us!
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Tears of laughter, more like it! Literally the most deluded Corbyn booster who told us Boris was completely doomed before the election is now 100% certain that Boris is ... completely doomed. Wrong before, wrong again.
    Nah, Johnson will be gutted CHB doesn't rate him. As we speak Johnson is formulating a policy to bring CHB on board.
    I think you're right, after all - if the CHB demographic can be swung next time, then Islington North and Bootle will finally be within the Tory grasp... :wink:
    I reckon Johnson has got a decent chance of swaying me
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Tears of laughter, more like it! Literally the most deluded Corbyn booster who told us Boris was completely doomed before the election is now 100% certain that Boris is ... completely doomed. Wrong before, wrong again.
    Nah, Johnson will be gutted CHB doesn't rate him. As we speak Johnson is formulating a policy to bring CHB on board.
    Can he get me a fan?
    Maybe he IS a fan!
  • Options
    felix said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Like the rest of us!
    Including the writer of them
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    What surprises me is that the Palace didn't veto this one. It looks bad for them too.
    Can the Palace veto life peerages?
    Do the Standards Committee not get involved in these kind of decisions?
    It’s the House of Lords Appointment Commission which vets the candidates but they do not have a veto. Ultimately, it’s the PM who makes the decision. So this is on Johnson and no-one else.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    F1: just checked the forecast and Barcelona is 27C, feels like 35C next weekend.

    I wonder if Mercedes will be sweating.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    felix said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Like the rest of us!
    Including the writer of them
    Tears of joy I hope.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    I think Boris's desire to be liked is a little misinterpreted. Obviously he wants to be liked, but he surely knows and understands that to be as liked as he is by some, he will be hated by others. He hasn't sought to be bland and liked, lukewarmly, by as many as possible, he's chosen the ones he wants to please and focused on them.
  • Options
    I love making predictions.

    Squareroot2 to construct a readable sentence by the end of the decade
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    I think Boris's desire to be liked is a little misinterpreted. Obviously he wants to be liked, but he surely knows and understands that to be as liked as he is by some, he will be hated by others. He hasn't sought to be bland and liked, lukewarmly, by as many as possible, he's chosen the ones he wants to please and focused on them.
    If he can get me a drink I'm sure those approval ratings will turn around in no time
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,801
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Sturgeon threw him under a bus.

    Now he’s throwing OFQUAL under a bus.

    OFQUAL are throwing teachers under a bus.

    The children just get totally ignored as a load of fifth rate wankers try to save their worthless careers.
    Eh? SQA surely, or am I missing something?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
  • Options

    felix said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Boris hates to be disliked, so he may be reading CHBs post in tears!
    Like the rest of us!
    Including the writer of them
    Tears of joy I hope.
    No comment
  • Options
    Can somebody explain squareroot2, is it just a very poorly written AI trying to assimilate
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    Can somebody explain squareroot2, is it just a very poorly written AI trying to assimilate

    Translation from Russian?
  • Options

    F1: very satisfied with that result.

    Morris - I don't know whether you saw my post on the previous thread, but that was a terrific F1 tip from you from which I have profited very nicely ... many thanks!
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
    It is fairly certain that Claire Fox is an unknown to the public and as soon as this line is introduced a cascade of Corbyn's involvement with the IRA, which is known, will descend on labour

    I do not see it as the best approach on the subject though I can only think she received her peerage as a confirmed Brexiteer
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Putney, no, I missed it, but thank you. Normally tips have more luck for or against them but today's was very nice.

    Verstappen was 12 for the win, which isn't bad. I think he, and maybe Leclerc, will be interested in the podium again next weekend.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    kle4 said:

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
    It is fairly certain that Claire Fox is an unknown to the public and as soon as this line is introduced a cascade of Corbyn's involvement with the IRA, which is known, will descend on labour

    I do not see it as the best approach on the subject though I can only think she received her peerage as a confirmed Brexiteer
    I am sure you are over analysing the Machiavellian genius of either Johnson or Cummings. I suspect it was just an unforced error.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
  • Options

    kle4 said:

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
    It is fairly certain that Claire Fox is an unknown to the public and as soon as this line is introduced a cascade of Corbyn's involvement with the IRA, which is known, will descend on labour

    I do not see it as the best approach on the subject though I can only think she received her peerage as a confirmed Brexiteer
    I am sure you are over analysing the Machiavellian genius of either Johnson or Cummings. I suspect it was just an unforced error.
    Maybe and maybe
  • Options

    F1: very satisfied with that result.

    Morris - I don't know whether you saw my post on the previous thread, but that was a terrific F1 tip from you from which I have profited very nicely ... many thanks!
    By such a tiny, weeny, fine margin too ... I see our man secured the crucial 10th place and thereby a single point by defeating his team mate by less than a second. If you were watching it live I'm surprised you weren't wetting yourself!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,711
    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    What surprises me is that the Palace didn't veto this one. It looks bad for them too.
    Can the Palace veto life peerages?
    Do the Standards Committee not get involved in these kind of decisions?
    It’s the House of Lords Appointment Commission which vets the candidates but they do not have a veto. Ultimately, it’s the PM who makes the decision. So this is on Johnson and no-one else.
    Yes - he carries the can - but do we actually know he nominated Fox for consideration in the first place?

    The Commission website suggests they are responsible for making recommendations for non-party-political peerages

    https://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/vetting

    Doesn't remotely absolve Johnson from responsibility - but the f*ckwittery may not have originated in no.10.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Putney, I had an eye on it, but that was nothing compared to 40 laps of Verstappen keeping a clearly faster Raikkonen behind him in Spain 2016, or Button benefiting from the last lap error by Vettel in Canada 2011.

    The former in particular was quite intense to watch due to the 250/1 tip riding on it.

    Just on today, though: passing can be pretty hard. This harmed Kvyat when he was stuck behind road block-Ocon for a long time but that also helped him later, with his team mate preventing the likes of Vettel or Sainz making progress. my main concern for Kvyat was reliability/tyres, after what happened last time.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    What surprises me is that the Palace didn't veto this one. It looks bad for them too.
    Can the Palace veto life peerages?
    Do the Standards Committee not get involved in these kind of decisions?
    It’s the House of Lords Appointment Commission which vets the candidates but they do not have a veto. Ultimately, it’s the PM who makes the decision. So this is on Johnson and no-one else.
    Yes - he carries the can - but do we actually know he nominated Fox for consideration in the first place?

    The Commission website suggests they are responsible for making recommendations for non-party-political peerages

    https://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/vetting

    Doesn't remotely absolve Johnson from responsibility - but the f*ckwittery may not have originated in no.10.
    You’d have thought that if this did not originate in No 10 this fact might have been leaked. And since he approved it he still shouldn’t get to dodge responsibility.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,711
    I hadn't seen it presented quite so starkly:

    Pass rates for pupils in the most deprived data zones were reduced by 15.2% in comparison with 6.9% for pupils from the most affluent backgrounds.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-8609457/Scotland-s-fire-Education-Secretary-address-exam-results-chaos.html
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    The hell is the BBC doing with regards use of language. If you make an editorial decision to use charged language to highlight an appalling attack them you need to stick with it.
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    kle4 said:

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
    It is fairly certain that Claire Fox is an unknown to the public and as soon as this line is introduced a cascade of Corbyn's involvement with the IRA, which is known, will descend on labour

    I do not see it as the best approach on the subject though I can only think she received her peerage as a confirmed Brexiteer
    Keep upto date Corbyn is not the leader anymore..
    Talk about fighting yesterdays battles.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    Well, I have never before been condemned for sharing in Johnson's shame.

    I was merely pointing out that Corbyn's evil remains ever present. This woman's unpleasant, peculiar views are from history, Corbyn's remain today..
    Her views are not from history. They are not peculiar. They are dangerous. Someone who denies facts is no better than a Holocaust denier. She has never recanted them. She is a female version of Corbyn.

    But unlike him, once she is in the Lords we can never vote her out.

    It is utterly contemptible and contemptuous of the public the Tories claim to be speaking for.
    House of Lords = House of UNELECTED Has-Beens! (or Never-Beens, in many cases!)
  • Options

    F1: very satisfied with that result.

    Morris - I don't know whether you saw my post on the previous thread, but that was a terrific F1 tip from you from which I have profited very nicely ... many thanks!
    In my previous post directed at you, I pointed out that those nice folk at BETFRED gave me odds of 6.5/1on your tip, compared with only 4/1 on offer from some other bookies, e.g bet365 & Skybet, a price advantage of 62.5% ... incredible. It's certainly the case that over the years a considerable element of my betting profits has resulted from comparing odds on Oddschecker. I also bemoaned the fact that sadly, for whatever reason, Ladbrokes no longer feature in their comparisons.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    F1: post-race ramble:
    https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2020/08/70th-anniversary-grand-prix-post-race.html

    Not long till we're racing again. Spain, next weekend.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190
    Pulpstar said:

    The hell is the BBC doing with regards use of language. If you make an editorial decision to use charged language to highlight an appalling attack them you need to stick with it.

    ????
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,465
    I don't approve of Claire Fox being given a peerage until and unless she has thoroughly disowned her previously stated views on the IRA, and explained how she got it so wrong then and why she thinks differently now. That aside, I suppose I do see her as being something of an asset to the Lords - she certainly brings a difference of view. There's also something quite satisfying about seeing a former
    commie joining their Lordships.



  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    The hell is the BBC doing with regards use of language. If you make an editorial decision to use charged language to highlight an appalling attack them you need to stick with it.

    Which language?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    I suspect the Fox case is yet another example of Cummings not caring what any else thinks and any decision is a good one if it winds up backbench Tories or metropolitan commentators.

  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
  • Options
    DennisBetsDennisBets Posts: 244
    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party
  • Options
    Yorkcity said:

    kle4 said:

    No wonder you can't trust Boris Johnson, is the new Labour attack line.

    Thank God, this is absolutely right.

    And the ad itself looks simple but devastating, let's get back to winning

    That he cannot be trusted is not exactly a new attack. His own party's MPs didn't trust him even a few years ago. Time in office may make it hit harder, but it's not exactly a grand approach that no one had thought of before.
    It is fairly certain that Claire Fox is an unknown to the public and as soon as this line is introduced a cascade of Corbyn's involvement with the IRA, which is known, will descend on labour

    I do not see it as the best approach on the subject though I can only think she received her peerage as a confirmed Brexiteer
    Keep upto date Corbyn is not the leader anymore..
    Talk about fighting yesterdays battles.
    As far as I know he is still an mp and will have a lot to say on ECHR very soon v Starmer
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    I suspect the Fox case is yet another example of Cummings not caring what any else thinks and any decision is a good one if it winds up backbench Tories or metropolitan commentators.

    And if it winds up the parents of murdered children (the Parrys) or the husbands of paralysed wives (Tebbit) or the many other victims of terrorism?

    Or don’t they count in the Johnson-Cummings world view?
  • Options

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    Well, I have never before been condemned for sharing in Johnson's shame.

    I was merely pointing out that Corbyn's evil remains ever present. This woman's unpleasant, peculiar views are from history, Corbyn's remain today..
    Her views are not from history. They are not peculiar. They are dangerous. Someone who denies facts is no better than a Holocaust denier. She has never recanted them. She is a female version of Corbyn.

    But unlike him, once she is in the Lords we can never vote her out.

    It is utterly contemptible and contemptuous of the public the Tories claim to be speaking for.
    House of Lords = House of UNELECTED Has-Beens! (or Never-Beens, in many cases!)
    For me I would abolish the whole lot of them
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party

    Where are you getting "randomly" from?
  • Options

    I suspect the Fox case is yet another example of Cummings not caring what any else thinks and any decision is a good one if it winds up backbench Tories or metropolitan commentators.

    Some truth in that to be fair
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Putney, there was some discussion of the Odds Checker situation here a few weeks ago by those who do rather more betting (and with larger stakes) than me. Some behind the scenes reasons, disagreement over fees, etc. Seems a shame.
  • Options
    DennisBetsDennisBets Posts: 244
    IshmaelZ said:

    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party

    Where are you getting "randomly" from?
    When you have a peace process someone has to talk to the otherside. Let's be honest under Miliband it was clever to accuse everyone of supporting the SNP. If its not the SNP or IRA then any non tory supposedly supports the Russians, funny how the other Fox seems to have got away scot free from giving the Russians everything they wanted to know.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
    lol - his dad next no doubt.

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.
  • Options
    DennisBetsDennisBets Posts: 244
    kinabalu said:

    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
    lol - his dad next no doubt.

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.
    Yep I've even been agreeing with Mrs May and her comments thats how bad it is. It's like England under Don Revie
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited August 2020
    Pulpstar said:

    The hell is the BBC doing with regards use of language. If you make an editorial decision to use charged language to highlight an appalling attack them you need to stick with it.

    This particular word is not only very problematic, but it has grown into a situation where it is ok for some to use it, not others, irrelevant of context. Clearly the BBC reporter wasn't been racist, and trying to highlight why the incident was being considered as racially motivated.

    If it is wrong for the BBC reporter to use it in this context, is it also wrong for DJ on the likes of BBC 1Xtra to ever play a track that uses this word? Is it now wrong for the BBC to ever have a historical programme which highlights says the kind of racist language that was the norm 50-60 years ago in the US?

    For me it if the later is OK, surely it should be ok for the reporter to use it in the correct content. OR, neither are ok.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Biden is expected to unveil his vice-presidential choice in the next few days. A majority of voters in both states, though, said the choice didn’t particularly matter to them β€” 62 percent in Pennsylvania said Biden’s selection was β€œnot very important” or β€œnot at all important,” as did 56 percent in Wisconsin.

    Politico
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    IshmaelZ said:

    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party

    Where are you getting "randomly" from?
    When you have a peace process someone has to talk to the otherside. Let's be honest under Miliband it was clever to accuse everyone of supporting the SNP. If its not the SNP or IRA then any non tory supposedly supports the Russians, funny how the other Fox seems to have got away scot free from giving the Russians everything they wanted to know.
    It was an accident.

    It was only a trade dossier.

    It's not like he's ever had a job like Secretary of State for Defence, where being so casual with electronic data would be a serious breach of national security.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190

    Pulpstar said:

    The hell is the BBC doing with regards use of language. If you make an editorial decision to use charged language to highlight an appalling attack them you need to stick with it.

    This particular word is not only very problematic, but it has grown into a situation where it is ok for some to use it, not others, irrelevant of context. Clearly the BBC reporter wasn't been racist, and trying to highlight why the incident was being considered as racially motivated.

    If it is wrong for the BBC reporter to use it in this context, is it also wrong for DJ on the likes of BBC 1Xtra to ever play a track that uses this word?

    For me it if the later is OK, surely it should be ok for the reporter to use it in the correct content. OR, neither are ok.
    Presumably it is edited out of music, but do you mean the BBC shouldn't play a song that contains that word in it's original form?
  • Options
    DennisBetsDennisBets Posts: 244

    IshmaelZ said:

    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party

    Where are you getting "randomly" from?
    When you have a peace process someone has to talk to the otherside. Let's be honest under Miliband it was clever to accuse everyone of supporting the SNP. If its not the SNP or IRA then any non tory supposedly supports the Russians, funny how the other Fox seems to have got away scot free from giving the Russians everything they wanted to know.
    It was an accident.

    It was only a trade dossier.

    It's not like he's ever had a job like Secretary of State for Defence, where being so casual with electronic data would be a serious breach of national security.
    Bit like that time Russia flooded twitter with stories of 80million turks arriving at Southampton Docks and then we accidentally voted to leave the EU.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,986
    kinabalu said:

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/1292465682299457536
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,442
    England Cases data - absolute

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    image
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,442
    England Cases data - scaled to 100K population

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    image
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,442
    England Cases data

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    image
    image
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220

    IshmaelZ said:

    With reference to the headline it's high time someone else gave the Tories a taste of their own medicine! Randomly accusing people of supporting the IRA is a top Tory policy, every weird kid and posh boy in middle England spent last year doing it to Labour. Time to stop playing fair, if the electorate are going to vote in the most barefaced liar every conceived with a giant majority it is proof they will believe anything. Might as well sink to the level of tory/brexit party

    Where are you getting "randomly" from?
    When you have a peace process someone has to talk to the otherside. Let's be honest under Miliband it was clever to accuse everyone of supporting the SNP. If its not the SNP or IRA then any non tory supposedly supports the Russians, funny how the other Fox seems to have got away scot free from giving the Russians everything they wanted to know.
    It was an accident.

    It was only a trade dossier.

    It's not like he's ever had a job like Secretary of State for Defence, where being so casual with electronic data would be a serious breach of national security.
    Bit like that time Russia flooded twitter with stories of 80million turks arriving at Southampton Docks and then we accidentally voted to leave the EU.
    They didn't? But I am sure I read on the side of a bus that Turkey had joined the EU?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,442
    PHE all settings deaths

    Headline - 9

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap. As expected, the demented layer is taking weekend off.

    image
    image
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,986

    I am sure I read on the side of a bus that Turkey had joined the EU?

    "We send Β£350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to the French Navy instead..."

    Coming to a bus near you!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,442
    NHS England hospital numbers

    Headline - 10
    7 days - 6
    Yesterday - 1

    image
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    kinabalu said:

    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
    lol - his dad next no doubt.

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.
    The older I get the more respect I have for John Major on policy.
    I think he did very well on the Maastricht Treaty and NI, he did what he thought was the best for the country against some bad enemies in his own party and the Murdoch empire.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,307
    It's Brendan I feel sorry for: Speccie's pet Marxist, zealous Brexit booster, arch-basher of Boris's enemies in the Metropolitan Elite. Yet he didn't get so much as an MBE.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Scott_xP said:

    kinabalu said:

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.

    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/1292465682299457536
    So why has he kept them closed since March? Sweden hasn't.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,004
    edited August 2020

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    What surprises me is that the Palace didn't veto this one. It looks bad for them too.
    Can the Palace veto life peerages?
    Do the Standards Committee not get involved in these kind of decisions?
    It’s the House of Lords Appointment Commission which vets the candidates but they do not have a veto. Ultimately, it’s the PM who makes the decision. So this is on Johnson and no-one else.
    Yes - he carries the can - but do we actually know he nominated Fox for consideration in the first place?

    The Commission website suggests they are responsible for making recommendations for non-party-political peerages

    https://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/vetting

    Doesn't remotely absolve Johnson from responsibility - but the f*ckwittery may not have originated in no.10.
    Second time typing this.

    The process probably went like this.

    Hmmm... the country voted for Brexit in the referendum and in the European Parliament elections. So we probably need to get a few Brexit Party people in the Lords. There's that ex-Labour lady from Vauxhall... OK, that's one. And Nigel Farage is a bit problematic, you say. OK, who else is there from the Brexit Party? An ex-libertarian woman? Oh, that sounds fine.

    To me, this sounds like a consequence of Johnson's rather lazy approach to being PM, rather than conspiracy.

    "Here's a list Prime Minister."
    "Good, good. Got a few Brexit people on there does it?"
    "Yes Prime Minister"
    "Excellent, thank you very much"
  • Options
    Turkey is joining the EU, Vote Leave told me so
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,986
    Yorkcity said:

    The older I get the more respect I have for John Major on policy.
    I think he did very well on the Maastricht Treaty and NI, he did what he thought was the best for the country against some bad enemies in his own party and the Murdoch empire.

    BoZo is about to find out just how helpful the "Bastards" can be.

    They really think they can still abandon the WA.
  • Options

    Mr. Putney, there was some discussion of the Odds Checker situation here a few weeks ago by those who do rather more betting (and with larger stakes) than me. Some behind the scenes reasons, disagreement over fees, etc. Seems a shame.

    Morris - Thanks for that. I do recall that Oddschecker was owned/maybe still is by a major bookmaking firm (SkyBet iirc?), perhaps this has something to do with Ladbrokes no longer appearing in their listings.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Sturgeon threw him under a bus.

    Now he’s throwing OFQUAL under a bus.

    OFQUAL are throwing teachers under a bus.

    The children just get totally ignored as a load of fifth rate wankers try to save their worthless careers.
    Eh? SQA surely, or am I missing something?
    I am suspicious of the coincidence that Swinney stuck by the SQA until 24 hours after it emerged OFQUAL had used the same algorithm.

    Of course, I may be being slightly unfair.

    It does however have the effect of further screwing up the results debacle that the Scottish government have admitted their figures are essentially horse shit.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,122
    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
    lol - his dad next no doubt.

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.
    The older I get the more respect I have for John Major on policy.
    I think he did very well on the Maastricht Treaty and NI, he did what he thought was the best for the country against some bad enemies in his own party and the Murdoch empire.
    I think Major is due a reassessment. He played a difficult hand well. He is also a thoroughly decent man. He and Ken Clarke are perhaps the last Tories I respected. The current lot with their mates' rates Covid contracts for party donors in the spivvier parts of the financial sector, their weird embrace of loathsome ex-Trot genocide deniers and their congenital dishonesty and bullshit are a disgrace to their party as well as a stain on our country.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Scott_xP said:

    Yorkcity said:

    The older I get the more respect I have for John Major on policy.
    I think he did very well on the Maastricht Treaty and NI, he did what he thought was the best for the country against some bad enemies in his own party and the Murdoch empire.

    BoZo is about to find out just how helpful the "Bastards" can be.

    They really think they can still abandon the WA.
    Apparently they don't like a border down the Irish Sea.

    No idea where that policy came from myself.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,307
    Incidentally, why didn't Jo Johnson stand at the last GE? Had Boris withdrawn the whip?
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,864
    Afternoon all :)

    Solid if unspectacular leads for Biden in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in the latest polls. These states were won by Trump by less than a point in 2016 so that's a 3% swing to Biden and the Democrats.

    As others have said, that's a long way from comfortable. To be fair, Obama carried both states by 5-6 points in 2012 so that suggests currently we're in that area (Obama beat Romney 51-47 nationally).

    Obama won both by double figure margins in 2008 but that was on a blowout night - generally both states are very close so this poll isn't a huge surprise,

    There's a complex picture emerging of Biden doing very well in some states he needs to win and less well in others. Trump's support in resilient and keeping him competitive in some states.

    PA and WI have 30 Electoral College votes so we can all appreciate their significance.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287

    Incidentally, why didn't Jo Johnson stand at the last GE? Had Boris withdrawn the whip?

    As I recall, he announced his retirement from the Commons when he quit as a minister.

    He may already have been promised a peerage at that time, of course.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,220
    Scott_xP said:

    I am sure I read on the side of a bus that Turkey had joined the EU?

    "We send Β£350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to the French Navy instead..."

    Coming to a bus near you!
    So long as we keep Johnny Foreigner out, eh?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,632

    England Cases data - absolute

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    image

    It isn't exactly improving here in Bradford council area.

    Meanwhile over the border in Craven, 1 case in a fortnight.

    Looks like we'll be in partial lockdown for a while longer. We can still go to the places we don't want to go to but not to those that we do. 50 strangers in a pub is safe, two relatives in their house is unsafe. I think the technical term for that is arse about face.
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,307
    ydoethur said:

    Incidentally, why didn't Jo Johnson stand at the last GE? Had Boris withdrawn the whip?

    As I recall, he announced his retirement from the Commons when he quit as a minister.

    He may already have been promised a peerage at that time, of course.
    I'm sure he had no idea and his subsequent peerage was just a bit of damned good luck.
  • Options
    I wonder if Blair would have won 2010
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    This all seems rather decadently trivial, compared with the news that UK GDP is expected to register a 21% drop in the 2nd Quarter, this week - by far the worst in the G7.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/aug/09/uk-to-fall-into-deepest-slump-on-record-with-worst-fall-in-gdp-among-g7
  • Options
    LadyG said:

    This all seems rather decadently trivial, compared with the news that UK GDP is expected to register a 21% drop in the 2nd Quarter, this week - by far the worst in the G7.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/aug/09/uk-to-fall-into-deepest-slump-on-record-with-worst-fall-in-gdp-among-g7

    We're winning again - and Brexit to come as well.

    I wonder how bad the economic situation would need to get before we consider EEA
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,987
    Mr. Battery, only with hindsight.

    Blair by that stage was reviled by many. He would've lost badly, probably worse than Brown did.

    But if he had then we would've had no Coalition.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,287

    I wonder if Blair would have won 2010

    I personally think he could have lost more badly. Brown’s dismal performance as PM was one issue, but hardly the only one, and it’s easy to imagine given SNP success in by-elections leading up to 2010 that Labour would not have done as well in Scotland had Brown not been the leader.
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Worth repeating, that's a TWENTY ONE PERCENT drop in GDP in one quarter.

    The economy of the nation has just shrunk by a fifth. In three months. This is probably the sharpest fall since that comet wiped out the dinosaurs. This is the worst drop in recorded history.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,986

    Scott_xP said:

    I am sure I read on the side of a bus that Turkey had joined the EU?

    "We send Β£350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to the French Navy instead..."

    Coming to a bus near you!
    So long as we keep Johnny Foreigner out, eh?
    https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1292426609975349248
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344

    Incidentally, why didn't Jo Johnson stand at the last GE? Had Boris withdrawn the whip?

    I don't think he said it explicitly, but the implication was that he found the strain of being pro-EU and loyal to his brother was too much.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,420
    edited August 2020
    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...but she has recanted her former madness. Corbyn wanted to foist his onto all of us.

    Oh and first.

    Somebody nobody has ever heard of was a headcase thirty years ago. But has since recanted.

    Be honest, this is not about the IRA. It is about Brexit.

    She has not recanted. Not her support for the IRA. Nor her denial of the Serbian genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. Nor her vile views on child abuse videos and jihadist videos.

    If the PM wanted a Brexit supporter in the Lords (why? it’s been done, we keep being told) Carswell or Hannan would do. Gisela Stuart and Kate Hoey were ennobled. What does Fox bring other than a disregard for facts, vile opinions and insults to those bereaved and injured by terrorists?

    It is utterly shameful by the PM and Tory supporters who defend it share in his shame.
    What surprises me is that the Palace didn't veto this one. It looks bad for them too.
    Can the Palace veto life peerages?
    Do the Standards Committee not get involved in these kind of decisions?
    It’s the House of Lords Appointment Commission which vets the candidates but they do not have a veto. Ultimately, it’s the PM who makes the decision. So this is on Johnson and no-one else.
    I think @MarqueeMark has a point. No-one knows who she is and it does not matter very much in the grand scheme of things if she is ennobled or not. A more interesting question is why she was proposed. Has Boris not heard of her either? Is Cummings too young to know the IRA used to be a big deal? Is Number 10 trolling Jeremy Corbyn?
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,864

    I wonder if Blair would have won 2010

    I think having seen what happened to Thatcher, Blair had already decided a decade and no more was the right option. Had there been no Iraq, Blair would have retired with his reputation largely undiminished.

    As for Brown, he ran into the biggest financial shock in decades and while I think he and Alistair Darling responded well to the crisis, the damage had been done in the years of extravagant spending which could only be supported by consistent growth.

    The spending was only partly to blame - the Conservatives were keen to be seen to be matching the spend. The problem was once economic activity stopped, the income crashed with it and the deficit ballooned out of control. Northern Rock had shown the huge economic and public order consequences of bank failure so every bank had to be rescued no matter the cost.

    It's the same problem Sunak faces now - most businesses have no plan for failure, no mechanism to deal with insolvency and that means very large businesses, with their tentacles in hundreds of smaller businesses down the supply and support chain, have to be rescued.

    Brown vs Cameron with no GFC - we'd still have had the expenses crisis which tarnished all politicians so after 13 years of Labour, there would have been a mood for change of some sort. Would there have been a Coalition? The convergence between the Cameroonian "liberal conservatives" and the Orange Bookers made it possible for the two sides to work together in a way unimaginable before or since. The convergence will perhaps be repeated as Starmer and Davey develop policies for the mid to late 2020s (some form of quasi-green agenda perhaps?)
  • Options
    ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649

    England Cases data - absolute

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    It isn't exactly improving here in Bradford council area.

    Meanwhile over the border in Craven, 1 case in a fortnight.

    Looks like we'll be in partial lockdown for a while longer. We can still go to the places we don't want to go to but not to those that we do. 50 strangers in a pub is safe, two relatives in their house is unsafe. I think the technical term for that is arse about face.
    Same in Calderdale. Still virtually zero mask wearing anywhere. Only one I've seen was an older man on Friday. Giving guidance and not rules does not work.
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Scott_xP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    I am sure I read on the side of a bus that Turkey had joined the EU?

    "We send Β£350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to the French Navy instead..."

    Coming to a bus near you!
    So long as we keep Johnny Foreigner out, eh?
    https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1292426609975349248
    It's not a "tiny number" crossing the Channel, not any more. It's thousands. And if we continue to allow it to happen, it could become tens of thousands.

  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,632

    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    Yorkcity said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    One rule for Boris Johnson and one rule for the rest of us.

    Johnson has rules?
    Oh he has rules, he just makes them up on the spot makes new ones when those no longer are useful for him.

    I hold him in complete and utter contempt. And for me he has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
    I'm sure he cares enormously what you think about him.
    Me too though. I'm very down on Johnson. More than I used to be. It's sad we have such a person as PM. We ought to have higher standards as a nation. Even some standards would be good.
    To be fair Johnson looked after his brother , who was a remainer.
    lol - his dad next no doubt.

    I find it impossible to respect the guy. There have been 7 PMs in my adult lifetime - 5 Tory 2 Labour - and this is the first time I've felt this way. Not a pleasant feeling either. I draw no energy or inspiration from it. It's depressing.
    The older I get the more respect I have for John Major on policy.
    I think he did very well on the Maastricht Treaty and NI, he did what he thought was the best for the country against some bad enemies in his own party and the Murdoch empire.
    I think Major is due a reassessment. He played a difficult hand well. He is also a thoroughly decent man. He and Ken Clarke are perhaps the last Tories I respected. The current lot with their mates' rates Covid contracts for party donors in the spivvier parts of the financial sector, their weird embrace of loathsome ex-Trot genocide deniers and their congenital dishonesty and bullshit are a disgrace to their party as well as a stain on our country.
    Thoroughly decent. As his mistress will testify.

  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    ukpaul said:

    England Cases data - absolute

    3-5 days, plus weekend reporting gap.

    It isn't exactly improving here in Bradford council area.

    Meanwhile over the border in Craven, 1 case in a fortnight.

    Looks like we'll be in partial lockdown for a while longer. We can still go to the places we don't want to go to but not to those that we do. 50 strangers in a pub is safe, two relatives in their house is unsafe. I think the technical term for that is arse about face.
    Same in Calderdale. Still virtually zero mask wearing anywhere. Only one I've seen was an older man on Friday. Giving guidance and not rules does not work.
    Even in shops?

    I just did a very fun holiday roadtrip across eastern England with the kids. Essex to Cambridgeshire via Suffolk. Mask wearing in shops - everywhere - was around 95% or higher.
  • Options
    Brown should have called the election in 2007
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,986
    LadyG said:

    It's not a "tiny number" crossing the Channel, not any more. It's thousands. And if we continue to allow it to happen, it could become tens of thousands.

    LOL

    You won. Suck it up!
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,632
    LadyG said:

    This all seems rather decadently trivial, compared with the news that UK GDP is expected to register a 21% drop in the 2nd Quarter, this week - by far the worst in the G7.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/aug/09/uk-to-fall-into-deepest-slump-on-record-with-worst-fall-in-gdp-among-g7

    A world-leading recession.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,864
    LadyG said:

    Worth repeating, that's a TWENTY ONE PERCENT drop in GDP in one quarter.

    The economy of the nation has just shrunk by a fifth. In three months. This is probably the sharpest fall since that comet wiped out the dinosaurs. This is the worst drop in recorded history.

    The question isn't what has happened, it's what is happening and what will happen and how percentages will be used to distort the truth.

    So, GDP was 100 and it's now 79 - in the third quarter, GDP rebounds by 20% - fantastic, we're back to 99, it's a V-shaped recovery and everything can get back to normal.

    No,a rebound of 20% puts us back to 95 so we're still 5% down.

    This is the point - we know there was pent-up demand which came out as restrictions eased but what's happening now?

    Okay, foolish of me to book a roast lunch with friends on the hottest weekend of the year BUT in east London, the roads were quiet, the restaurant quiet and the pub garden quiet.

    Coming back down from Manor Park to East Ham at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon, I'd say in excess of 50% of the shops closed and shuttered.

    I know the seaside resorts are doing well but how are things generally?
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Scott_xP said:

    LadyG said:

    It's not a "tiny number" crossing the Channel, not any more. It's thousands. And if we continue to allow it to happen, it could become tens of thousands.

    LOL

    You won. Suck it up!
    WTF has this got to do with Brexit? I presume that is what you are referring to?

    The French have acted like wankers over this issue for years, pre Brexit and post Brexit. They let the migrants cross at various frontiers then wave them through to the Channel ports. Now the migrants have found a new way of crossing. That is all.

    You are demented.
This discussion has been closed.