Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
Late to the party, but that is damn lazy, though I've certainly prepared a document with one option, copied it, then adjusted it for the other option, myself.
Pretty funny though. Also funny that Guido will always prefer a chance to mock a cock up than avoid it just because he is so partisan (which of course he would be).
I just performed an analysis, determined to show that this is fake news from Guido... but they're right. You can see for yourself by using fotoforensics.com and the image url (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmPRWjyVoAEBIBI?format=jpg&name=4096x4096). Choose the ELA filter, click the lower image to get the full version, and zoom in above Biden... You can also see some artefacts around "look forward" and "shared priorities", but I can't quite make out what it says.
Whilst it's a bit amateurish by a junior person in a comms team somewhere, I do slightly struggle to see the political relevance of this story.
I'd imagine government comms teams prepare statements to congratulate either potential winner of a major foreign election and put out whichever applies. Am I missing something?
None it means anything it's just funny, like the needyness of who gets visited/called first.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Imagine if, through some twist of fate, an English republic were to emerge. Would the Tory party cease to exist, and if not would it favour the status quo, or the restoration of the monarchy and the union?
Highly unlikely, support for the monarchy is about the only thing a majority of Tory and Labour voters agree on at the moment (though Labour voters still less than Tory voters), though yes undoubtedly the Tory Party would cease to exist in that scenario and a new centre right party would replace it or else would become a party for those who wanted to restore the monarchy and the Union
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Wait. You can't be an atheist? Where is that in the rules? Or indeed in any policy?
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Wait. You can't be an atheist? Where is that in the rules? Or indeed in any policy?
Quite. Even accepting the general principles of a party as firm no one will ever perfectly align to them on all issues. There are Republican tories, atheist Tories, and really what benefit is there to telling those people they are not real Tories?
If we can learn anything from the corbynites it's the folly of telling what should be fellow travellers to bugger off.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
Look, Dr Donald came up with the idea of injecting people with Toilet Duck. Just because some Johnny-Come-Lately trivially tweaks it by using mRNA rather than bleach, doesn't mean they can come and claim credit now. It's simply Fake News.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
So long as you have Thatcher's face tattooed on your right buttcheek you can do anything.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Just for clarity as I am not sure why you mention it otherwise:
Are you saying an atheist can not join the Tory party?
It could mean it's ok to want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union, so long as you're not an atheist too. It's OK to be an atheist so long as you don't want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union. Or some other combination. A bit of clarity please!
Yes I had spotted it was all 'And's (hence the way I asked my question), but from previous discussion I and others have had with Hyufd he isn't hot on logical structures. I presume they should all be 'Or's.
But as you say some clarity might be useful as clearly there is some leeway there. For instance there is clearly a logical subset whereby a non Anglican gets a pass under certain circumstances if they tick the other 2 boxes, but are there subsets to that. Jews and Catholics clearly get some favoritism, but what about Atheists, Druids, Satanists.
I think a three dimensional matrix is needed so we can see before applying to join the local Conservatives.
I'm not quite sure what relevance that has to RCP's failure to accept the PA result except of course as a GOP site putting PA into the Biden column loses the presidency for Trump.. This isn't about polling but the reputation of RCP to rise above their bias. They have failed in that respect miserably.
Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
I certainly agree with this. It is the 5% of the time that the law does bonkers stuff, but for most of the time it is just common sense.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's or Nick Clegg's Liberal Democrat party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
Not quite believing the Guido story about the PM's tweet I looked at it myself. You can definitely see the word Trump in the message. Utter beggars belief. I actually can't think of how you would do this without it being intentional.
So... does that mean the polls weren't much wrong after all???
It means RCP despite being mocked by Nate Silver for not including all the polls he did in their poll average and for including Trafalgar may have had the last laugh after all
AFAIK Nate Silver included Trafalgar in the 538 averages. But it's worth looking into whether the 538 averages have some bias. I like them because the adjustments they make should reduce some of the noise due to the "which was the last pollster to poll this state" effect, so should make more consistent comparisons possible, but I don't believe they are completely transparent about the exact calculations they make. And the more adjustments, the more chance that some faulty assumptions creep in.
But if we take the RCP polling averages, then maybe the polls once all the votes are counted won't look bad at all. Their final national polling average has Biden 2.9% ahead. He's currently 3.0% ahead and rising, so pretty close with the national polls only slightly underestimating Biden's lead. Must be those shy Biden voters everyone is talking about.
EDIT oops misread their table - they had Biden 7.2% ahead so we are back to shy Trumpers.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Wait. You can't be an atheist? Where is that in the rules? Or indeed in any policy?
Or Dissenter. Which takes us back, oh, 200 years?
I get the "He's a Shire Tory" bit. But the Party can't win on that even in England. Much of the North is Catholic and non-conformist (to the extent that any bit of England is Christian). It does explain some of the attitudes though. See furlough for Tiers for example and the spat with Burnham. It is the "Real England" mindset. Which exists South and East of Birmingham and excludes London.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
For some reason I can't imagine Boris is a monarchist. I also suspect he doesn't care that much and that isn't a criticism; I am much the same.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
So why is it following reckless populism and policies that will lead to the separation of Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland later on instead of you know, actual conservative and unionist policies?
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
So... does that mean the polls weren't much wrong after all???
Only if you include the ones like Trafalgar and Rasmussen which didn't go with the flow. Ironically, they are now being conscripted to save the polling industry.
It also probably explains why RCP was closer than Silver - the latter would have rated more "A" star polls which simply weren't good (apart from IBD/TIPP)
For most of the "established" polling industry,. they got it badly wrong.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
So why is it following reckless populism and policies that will lead to the separation of Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland later on instead of you know, actual conservative and unionist policies?
The Tories are not allowing indyref2 for a generation and are committed to no hard border in Ireland either, Philip Thompson positively wants to break up the Union
Look, Dr Donald came up with the idea of injecting people with Toilet Duck. Just because some Johnny-Come-Lately trivially tweaks it by using mRNA rather than bleach, doesn't mean they can come and claim credit now. It's simply Fake News.
We knew this virus could be killed with soap from the beginning. The big breakthrough was obviously Donald's insight that the cure needed to be put inside the body. If it were left to the experts, they'd have been washing their hands with the vaccine instead of injecting it.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Just for clarity as I am not sure why you mention it otherwise:
Are you saying an atheist can not join the Tory party?
It could mean it's ok to want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union, so long as you're not an atheist too. It's OK to be an atheist so long as you don't want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union. Or some other combination. A bit of clarity please!
Yes I had spotted it was all 'And's (hence the way I asked my question), but from previous discussion I and others have had with Hyufd he isn't hot on logical structures. I presume they should all be 'Or's.
But as you say some clarity might be useful as clearly there is some leeway there. For instance there is clearly a logical subset whereby a non Anglican gets a pass under certain circumstances if they tick the other 2 boxes, but are there subsets to that. Jews and Catholics clearly get some favoritism, but what about Atheists, Druids, Satanists.
I think a three dimensional matrix is needed so we can see before applying to join the local Conservatives.
And supporting the right footy team. Very important, at least in Glasgow.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
For some reason I can't imagine Boris is a monarchist. I also suspect he doesn't care that much and that isn't a criticism; I am much the same.
I suspect the only issue he has is it isn't him on the throne.
Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
True - to a point.
A relative works in a field where US style lawsuits to negotiate reductions in prices are becoming standard.
After reading up the law in that area, and going through a couple of these things, he has represented himself successfully several times.
He did this because he observed that in most such cases, it is plainly evident that the other side has literally no case - in each case he acted for himself, it got thrown out at the earliest possible moment.
Which does rather make you wonder about the expensive lawyers that are often used in these cases - are they simply taking fees from idiots, rather than advising them?
Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
I certainly agree with this. It is the 5% of the time that the law does bonkers stuff, but for most of the time it is just common sense.
Yes - if you stray into that 5% you probably do need to lawyer up.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Just for clarity as I am not sure why you mention it otherwise:
Are you saying an atheist can not join the Tory party?
It could mean it's ok to want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union, so long as you're not an atheist too. It's OK to be an atheist so long as you don't want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union. Or some other combination. A bit of clarity please!
Yes I had spotted it was all 'And's (hence the way I asked my question), but from previous discussion I and others have had with Hyufd he isn't hot on logical structures. I presume they should all be 'Or's.
But as you say some clarity might be useful as clearly there is some leeway there. For instance there is clearly a logical subset whereby a non Anglican gets a pass under certain circumstances if they tick the other 2 boxes, but are there subsets to that. Jews and Catholics clearly get some favoritism, but what about Atheists, Druids, Satanists.
I think a three dimensional matrix is needed so we can see before applying to join the local Conservatives.
And supporting the right footy team. Very important, at least in Glasgow.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
Just for clarity as I am not sure why you mention it otherwise:
Are you saying an atheist can not join the Tory party?
It could mean it's ok to want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union, so long as you're not an atheist too. It's OK to be an atheist so long as you don't want to abolish the monarchy and break up the union. Or some other combination. A bit of clarity please!
Yes I had spotted it was all 'And's (hence the way I asked my question), but from previous discussion I and others have had with Hyufd he isn't hot on logical structures. I presume they should all be 'Or's.
But as you say some clarity might be useful as clearly there is some leeway there. For instance there is clearly a logical subset whereby a non Anglican gets a pass under certain circumstances if they tick the other 2 boxes, but are there subsets to that. Jews and Catholics clearly get some favoritism, but what about Atheists, Druids, Satanists.
I think a three dimensional matrix is needed so we can see before applying to join the local Conservatives.
And supporting the right footy team. Very important, at least in Glasgow.
Bloody hell - 4 dimensional.
Not necessarily, at least in the bad old days - the correlation with education, politics, etc. was so strong that you didn't need to do a PCA.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
So why is it following reckless populism and policies that will lead to the separation of Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland later on instead of you know, actual conservative and unionist policies?
The Tories are not allowing indyref2 for a generation and are committed to no hard border in Ireland either, Philip Thompson positively wants to break up the Union
Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
This could well be right in general matters of legal advice.
And yet... people who defend themselves in court famously do not do well?
"According to figures released by Andy Slaughter, the shadow legal aid minister, of the 25,500 incapacity benefit cases in 2009/10, some 60% of people without legal representation lost, compared with just 33% of those who had lawyers." https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-12578577
That to me speaks to a broken system.
One way of fixing it, is to spend a lot of money making sure each side can afford similarly well trained lawyers. That does seem quite wasteful though. Another way might be to scrap the adversarial system?
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
Sorry Philip I can't promise your requirements for joining the LDs.
I think it confirms the 'special relationship' with President Biden will be with Canada first, then Ireland, not us and certainly not us under PM Boris
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Based on your username and avatar I fear you may be the wrong denomination of Atheist anyways.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
Sorry Philip I can't promise your requirements for joining the LDs.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
But you're trying to pretend that atheism is an issue. Where is that in the name of the party? Or its manifesto? Or its policies?
What has my atheism got to do with you, you crazed zealot?
You are assuming there is a forced choice on Scottish independence or Brexit, there is not and you ignore the polling showing Tory members would back banning indyref2 for a generation, which resolves the issue anyway even if Brexit goes ahead and in a hard Brexit form.
As you yourself have admitted you would happily vote for the LDs not the Tories in all circumstances
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Based on your username and avatar I fear you may be the wrong denomination of Atheist anyways.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them.
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Absolutely that's the difference. You can want to retain the church and monarchy - but you don't claim that only Anglicans are "true" Tories.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still claim to be a Tory
What if you are an anglican who wants to abolish the monarchy? or an atheist who supports the union? Which combinations are acceptable? We have a right to know!
I think @HYUFD may be alluding to the original origins of "Tory" which date back almost to the Civil War, and was based on defending land, church, union of the crowns, and monarchial interests.
Today, you'd really find a softened version of those sorts of people as Shire Tories which is more or less what I am and David Cameron is.
Indeed. He is referring to the party that was disbanded in the 19th century and was replaced with the Conservative Party of Peel and Disraeli which repealed the corn laws and emancipated Catholics.
The Conservative and Unionist Party, clue is in the title and Peel and Disraeli were also both monarchists as indeed is Boris today
So why is it following reckless populism and policies that will lead to the separation of Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland later on instead of you know, actual conservative and unionist policies?
The Tories are not allowing indyref2 for a generation and are committed to no hard border in Ireland either, Philip Thompson positively wants to break up the Union
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Yes, you're yet another one who wants to blow up the whole ship because you've been driven mad by Brexit, and sense it will drive mad in turn those who advocated for it.
I remember when you were posting on here regularly as a "Better Off Out" poster.
Your arguments and style were embarrassing then and are no less embarrassing now.
I think it confirms the 'special relationship' with President Biden will be with Canada first, then Ireland, not us and certainly not us under PM Boris
The “Special Relationship” is multifaceted - from security, intelligence (GCHQ and the NSE trust each other more than they trust their own governments and agencies), military, trade, investment, transport and so forth. The PM/President personal relationship is a visible, but ultimately relatively trivial aspect of it. Sometimes it’s great, sometimes not. Biden is a professional politician and I’m sure will have a perfectly good working relationship with Johnson - unless he persists with the IMB clauses.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
I used to support them back when they were a sane party. Then they started sliding to the right and left me behind. Then they let the nutters in and gave the grey vote carte blanche to shaft the young. At that point it was clear that the Conservative party of old was dead.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Yes, you're yet another one who wants to blow up the whole ship because you've been driven mad by Brexit, and sense it will drive mad in turn those who advocated for it.
I remember when you were posting on here regularly as a "Better Off Out" poster.
Your arguments and style were embarrassing then and are no less embarrassing now.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
Only purists. Where does that leave the twice crossed floor from Churchill in your grand scheme of things?
Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
This could well be right in general matters of legal advice.
And yet... people who defend themselves in court famously do not do well?
"According to figures released by Andy Slaughter, the shadow legal aid minister, of the 25,500 incapacity benefit cases in 2009/10, some 60% of people without legal representation lost, compared with just 33% of those who had lawyers." https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-12578577
That to me speaks to a broken system.
One way of fixing it, is to spend a lot of money making sure each side can afford similarly well trained lawyers. That does seem quite wasteful though. Another way might be to scrap the adversarial system?
I think this is probably because in-person advocacy in a courtroom is a rarer skill than the ability to understand the law.
Yes, interesting idea to take the rhetorical combat out of it. You'd lose something but maybe you'd gain more. I don't know.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
Only purists. Where does that leave the twice crossed floor from Churchill in your grand scheme of things?
Churchill was a monarchist, an Anglican and a Unionist
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
We got a majority of 80 once before without you.....
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
Only purists. Where does that leave the twice crossed floor from Churchill in your grand scheme of things?
Churchill was a monarchist, an Anglican and a Unionist
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
Sorry Philip I can't promise your requirements for joining the LDs.
Precisely.
We will just have to keep working on you.
I managed to convert a raving right wing Brexiteer friend to a raving namby pamby Remainer liberal friend.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
Sorry Philip I can't promise your requirements for joining the LDs.
Precisely.
We will just have to keep working on you.
I managed to convert a raving right wing Brexiteer friend to a raving namby pamby Remainer liberal friend.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Yes, you're yet another one who wants to blow up the whole ship because you've been driven mad by Brexit, and sense it will drive mad in turn those who advocated for it.
I remember when you were posting on here regularly as a "Better Off Out" poster.
Your arguments and style were embarrassing then and are no less embarrassing now.
The problem was that in my BOO days I had not really considered the problem and why would I? There was no prospect of leaving at that time.
Then everything changed.
When I looked at the argument in depth, it became clear that BOO was not going to work well and I changed my position (as per the quote from J M Keynes).
I have not been driven mad by Brexit - why should I? I am immune to Brexit thanks to my Irish citizenship. It is the Leavers who are going mad because their pet project is not going to plan. They are the ones running around blaming anyone and anything.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
The downplaying of Srbenica is a strangely recurring theme.
Top tip for anyone worried they might have a blind-spot when it comes to Islamophobia:
1. Take ANY statement by Boris Johnson that includes the words "Muslims" eg "“All right, I say, the fate of Srebrenica was appalling. But they weren’t exactly angels, these Muslims.”
2. If you find yourself thinking "well, he's got a point" replace the word "Muslims" with "Jews".
3. See how it sounds. (You might have to replace other bits so it makes sense - eg "Srebenica" with a situation where Jews were slaughtered.)
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Well it is blatantly obvious you have never been a Tory, so no surprise there!
Only purists. Where does that leave the twice crossed floor from Churchill in your grand scheme of things?
Churchill was a monarchist, an Anglican and a Unionist
Hyufd - you do realise we are all confused.
a) Are these 'And's or 'Or's in the requirement list (or maybe any 2 out of 3)
b) Is there a hierarchy regarding religious beliefs
Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
True - to a point.
A relative works in a field where US style lawsuits to negotiate reductions in prices are becoming standard.
After reading up the law in that area, and going through a couple of these things, he has represented himself successfully several times.
He did this because he observed that in most such cases, it is plainly evident that the other side has literally no case - in each case he acted for himself, it got thrown out at the earliest possible moment.
Which does rather make you wonder about the expensive lawyers that are often used in these cases - are they simply taking fees from idiots, rather than advising them?
That sounds rather like Trump & Co's use of lawyers. To intimidate. People do fall for it though. I've always been struck by the self-effacing term often seen in internet discussions - "IANAL". It's telling that there is no such common acronym equivalent for other fields.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
Sounds very familiar. But I think you are actually worse than the defenders of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Or had you "heard of" Labour councillors/activists (for example) before their anti-semitic tweets came to light?
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
We got a majority of 80 once before without you.....
Yes you did. Fortunately for me, I can still look in the mirror without guilt or shame at having put that complete ar*e of a PM into No.10.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
I share @HYUFD's views on retaining the established church and the monarchy, and I want the Union to continue and thrive, but I disagree on uncompromising tactics to do it and I am also happy the Conservative Party is a broad church.
I might surprise myself here considering how abusive he is but I even recognise @Nigel_Foremain as a fellow Tory too - albeit he's one I'd probably not make a beeline for at the bar.
Nigel Foremain bar his views on Brexit is a Tory as are you, Philip Thompson isn't
He's more of a classical liberal, yes, but I'm happy to have him in the same party.
We agree on most things, although not everything.
Thank you Casino.
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
You could equally be a free marketeer and believe in low taxes and be in Ed Davey's Liberal Democratic party, neither principle alone makes you a Tory.
You're right I could. If I trusted Ed Davey's Liberal Democrat Party to never go into coalition with Labour, or implement electoral reform that I oppose etc then I could be tempted.
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
Sorry Philip I can't promise your requirements for joining the LDs.
Precisely.
We will just have to keep working on you.
I managed to convert a raving right wing Brexiteer friend to a raving namby pamby Remainer liberal friend.
Beverley?
No. I do have to keep on top of it though. Without ongoing indoctrination he starts slipping back to his old beliefs.
The current outsider in USPE 2020 has been backed in from over 30 a few days ago to 11. What's going on? How much further can he come in before Betfair pay out on his opponent?
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
Sounds very familiar. But I think you are actually worse than the defenders of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Or had you "heard of" Labour councillors/activists (for example) before their anti-semitic tweets came to light?
Not quite as embarrassing as cancelling your membership of the National Trust on the say so of Toby Young I would have thought.
Yup, that was me and I did it based on reading its hatchet-job report in full and then I took my own decision as a consequence.
People are gradually coming round to my way of thinking on this Woke nonsense, including a high number of minorities - my wife's Sikh boss at Siemens went on a rant about how ludicrous it all was on her team meeting this morning.
I expect to be mocked for it relentlessly and then, once the zeitgeist is up, the same people will argue they really agreed with me all along.
Those who are able to demonstrate they have their own independent minds with the courage of their convictions will win my respect.
Re @Cyclefree Header, my biggest criticism of lawyers is they portray issues that are easy and simple as difficult and complex. They are not alone in this. All non scientific professions do it. Bankers. Economists. Accountants. All of them. They do it for a very good reason. It creates mystique and increases influence and earning power. But lawyers are the most guilty and the most successful at it. Why? Because people who are not lawyers - i.e. almost everybody - view the law as something they are unqualified to get to grips with without a licensed practitioner telling them how it is. Which is actually a nonsense. Does the intelligent layman need a chartered accountant to understand a balance sheet or a cashflow forecast? Not really. Same with most legal matters. But there is a fear of the law which stops people doing what in truth they are perfectly capable of and they turn to lawyers instead. Contrary to myth, almost all of the law is straightforward and follows the principles of general equity and common sense. 95% of the time people who get a legal opinion do not need a legal opinion. If you are faced with a situation and wish to find out the legal position, simply apply the principles of equity and common sense to it and 95% of the time that will be the legal position.
True - to a point.
A relative works in a field where US style lawsuits to negotiate reductions in prices are becoming standard.
After reading up the law in that area, and going through a couple of these things, he has represented himself successfully several times.
He did this because he observed that in most such cases, it is plainly evident that the other side has literally no case - in each case he acted for himself, it got thrown out at the earliest possible moment.
Which does rather make you wonder about the expensive lawyers that are often used in these cases - are they simply taking fees from idiots, rather than advising them?
That sounds rather like Trump & Co's use of the lawyers. To intimidate.
People do fall for it though. I've always been struck by the self-effacing term often seen in internet discussions - "IANAL".
It's telling that there is no such common acronym equivalent for other fields.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
Sounds very familiar. But I think you are actually worse than the defenders of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Or had you "heard of" Labour councillors/activists (for example) before their anti-semitic tweets came to light?
And if that's satire, Johnson should go back to being a third-rate comedian which is all he is good for. Sounds like the defences of Trump's shit: "it was a joke"
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
The downplaying of Srbenica is a strangely recurring theme.
Top tip for anyone worried they might have a blind-spot when it comes to Islamophobia:
1. Take ANY statement by Boris Johnson that includes the words "Muslims" eg "“All right, I say, the fate of Srebrenica was appalling. But they weren’t exactly angels, these Muslims.”
2. If you find yourself thinking "well, he's got a point" replace the word "Muslims" with "Jews".
3. See how it sounds. (You might have to replace other bits so it makes sense - eg "Srebenica" with a situation where Jews were slaughtered.)
NB: This doesn't work if you are an anti-semite.
If you actually bothered to read Johnson's article then yes what he said was entirely reasonable.
PS those words (which he was setting up for Bianca to demolish) weren't his words, they were the arguments the Serbs were using which he was deliberately getting demolished in response. Which you would have known if you had actually read the article.
It's the Trump/Kushner approach. They only trust people like them.
I think you can find this motif throughout society. Its obviously more enraging when your class and schooling means you would have previously benefited. But now Johnson has further tightened the field. Only those with two degrees of separation or less may apply.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
Sounds very familiar. But I think you are actually worse than the defenders of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Or had you "heard of" Labour councillors/activists (for example) before their anti-semitic tweets came to light?
Ken Livingston was quite obscure, I agree.
Almost as obscure as that other ex-mayor of London, what was his name, you know - the clown with the biting satire about Muslims?
On topic (sorry). Excellent thread Cyclefree. Not sure if we need fewer lawyers. However, we need lawyers to prioritise professionalism over fee income. Too many disputes are unnecessarily extended or delayed, not to the benefit of clients.
What I don't understand about HYUFD's routine about him being the only gay Tory in the village. Most political parties want people to identify with them. Support them. Vote for them. HYUFD seems to think the Conservative Party is his own personal fiefdom, with anybody else not worthy of being called a Conservative.
This Epping Conservative Association he runs. Does it have many members? Do they get the same absurd elitism from the chair?
I've seen Momentum branches run in a more inclusive manner.
We want people to vote for us who share Tory values and certainly only join us if they share Tory values, you might sometimes win a few swing voters at election time like Philip who do not share all your party's principles but that does not mean they should become Tory members
You are a very sad individual and to be honest CCHQ should investigate your bigoted comments, especially due to your position in your local constituency
There is nothing bigoted about what I said, indeed only last week the Secretary of State for Scotland as I said said there should be no indyref2 allowed for 25 to 40 years
That you said "even a Catholic" can be a Tory due to sharing "other" Tory values is disgusting bigotry.
The modern Conservative Party was founded by Peel and involved Catholic emancipation as an early achievement. The idea that the Tories are for Anglicans only shows again you're in the wrong party and in the wrong century, it seems you want the original Tories.
Alternatively it shows he fits right in. Open Islamophobia is very welcome in the Tory party.
No it isn't, stop trolling.
It's not trolling. It's what I sincerely believe. Islamophobia is today's acceptable bigotry - it is very much like anti-Catholic prejudice in the past.
You may sincerely believe it in the same way that Trump sincerely believes he won the election.
The rest of us are trying to deal with reality. Evidence or it didn't happen.
Link 1: A Councillor nobody has heard of. Can't really comment its a nobody and I know nothing of this person, but you're clearly scraping the bottom of the barrel to lead with this. Where's the MPs? Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself. Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article. Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
Sounds very familiar. But I think you are actually worse than the defenders of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Or had you "heard of" Labour councillors/activists (for example) before their anti-semitic tweets came to light?
And if that's satire, Johnson should go back to being a third-rate comedian which is all he is good for. Sounds like the defences of Trump's shit: "it was a joke"
Its not satire you idiot, it was a piece making a very strong political point.
Do you know what the point was? Have you bothered to read the article?
Johnson was saying the opposite of what you think he was saying. You just clearly don't know that as you've clearly copied and pasted that from someone else and not put any thought into it whatsoever. What Johnson was writing was attacking non-intervention and attacking letting the Muslims in Srebenica die. He set up the straw man in an interview for that straw man to be demolished. Those were not his thoughts, they were clearly a question being asked giving a platform to reply, it is an interview technique not a joke.
You can be a Catholic and a Jewish Tory if you are also a monarchist and Unionist, you cannot however be an atheist, who wants to abolish the monarchy and break up the Union as you do and still be a Tory
The more I read comments like this, the more it becomes obvious I can never be a Tory.
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
Yes, you're yet another one who wants to blow up the whole ship because you've been driven mad by Brexit, and sense it will drive mad in turn those who advocated for it.
I remember when you were posting on here regularly as a "Better Off Out" poster.
Your arguments and style were embarrassing then and are no less embarrassing now.
The problem was that in my BOO days I had not really considered the problem and why would I? There was no prospect of leaving at that time.
Then everything changed.
When I looked at the argument in depth, it became clear that BOO was not going to work well and I changed my position (as per the quote from J M Keynes).
I have not been driven mad by Brexit - why should I? I am immune to Brexit thanks to my Irish citizenship. It is the Leavers who are going mad because their pet project is not going to plan. They are the ones running around blaming anyone and anything.
The trouble is Beverley there is never any nuance or measuredness to your argument: you've gone from vociferously venting well to my right flank and then you quickly skedaddled after the vote to the other side and now are vociferously venting at me from the left-flank whilst undergoing a complete values shift in the process. There's no consistency at all except the use of a lot of smilies, and throwing barbs at the fundamentals of the British state.
Why would I take that seriously or want to engage with it?
Late to the party, but that is damn lazy, though I've certainly prepared a document with one option, copied it, then adjusted it for the other option, myself.
Pretty funny though. Also funny that Guido will always prefer a chance to mock a cock up than avoid it just because he is so partisan (which of course he would be).
I just performed an analysis, determined to show that this is fake news from Guido... but they're right. You can see for yourself by using fotoforensics.com and the image url (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmPRWjyVoAEBIBI?format=jpg&name=4096x4096). Choose the ELA filter, click the lower image to get the full version, and zoom in above Biden... You can also see some artefacts around "look forward" and "shared priorities", but I can't quite make out what it says.
Whilst it's a bit amateurish by a junior person in a comms team somewhere, I do slightly struggle to see the political relevance of this story.
I'd imagine government comms teams prepare statements to congratulate either potential winner of a major foreign election and put out whichever applies. Am I missing something?
None it means anything it's just funny, like the needyness of who gets visited/called first.
It's like the Owls story, or Trump's Four Seasons press conference. It does suggest a certain lack of professionalism.
Comments
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1326149041248407552?s=20
Tell that to the Germans!
Its worth remembering that the Conservative Party wasn't just founded by Tories, it also has repeatedly and deliberately absorbed Liberals. The Liberal Unionist Party merged into the Conservative Party over a century ago.
The idea of the Conservatives as the home of "true Tories" only hasn't been the case for centuries. Because the old differences between Tories and Whigs from centuries ago have largely been settled now and the real difference nowadays is between Conservatives and Labour and on the real big issues we are on the same side.
An atheist who believes in the free market and wants low taxes (like myself) belongs in the Conservative Party more than an Anglican Socialist does. Religion is not a 21st century dividing line in politics and HYUFD is a relic in thinking it is.
If we can learn anything from the corbynites it's the folly of telling what should be fellow travellers to bugger off.
Cade is wrong. We are far better off fighting in courtrooms then reverting to the older method of fighting on battlefields.
Must be the right cheek though.
But as you say some clarity might be useful as clearly there is some leeway there. For instance there is clearly a logical subset whereby a non Anglican gets a pass under certain circumstances if they tick the other 2 boxes, but are there subsets to that. Jews and Catholics clearly get some favoritism, but what about Atheists, Druids, Satanists.
I think a three dimensional matrix is needed so we can see before applying to join the local Conservatives.
I can understand why Johnson only had the one document. When he drew up two previous documents for the EU referendum, it got him into hot water.
But it's worth looking into whether the 538 averages have some bias. I like them because the adjustments they make should reduce some of the noise due to the "which was the last pollster to poll this state" effect, so should make more consistent comparisons possible, but I don't believe they are completely transparent about the exact calculations they make. And the more adjustments, the more chance that some faulty assumptions creep in.
But if we take the RCP polling averages, then maybe the polls once all the votes are counted won't look bad at all.
Their final national polling average has Biden 2.9% ahead. He's currently 3.0% ahead and rising, so pretty close with the national polls only slightly underestimating Biden's lead. Must be those shy Biden voters everyone is talking about.
EDIT oops misread their table - they had Biden 7.2% ahead so we are back to shy Trumpers.
It does explain some of the attitudes though. See furlough for Tiers for example and the spat with Burnham.
It is the "Real England" mindset. Which exists South and East of Birmingham and excludes London.
The poll came after another poll showing a majority of Tories would be happy to see Scottish independence as a price of Brexit: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence/poll-majority-tory-members-would-accept-scottish-independence-price-brexit-1415158
But you're trying to pretend that atheism is an issue. Where is that in the name of the party? Or its manifesto? Or its policies?
What has my atheism got to do with you, you crazed zealot?
It also probably explains why RCP was closer than Silver - the latter would have rated more "A" star polls which simply weren't good (apart from IBD/TIPP)
For most of the "established" polling industry,. they got it badly wrong.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1326148836516040709?s=20
FWIW I think Biden will see the funny side....
A relative works in a field where US style lawsuits to negotiate reductions in prices are becoming standard.
After reading up the law in that area, and going through a couple of these things, he has represented himself successfully several times.
He did this because he observed that in most such cases, it is plainly evident that the other side has literally no case - in each case he acted for himself, it got thrown out at the earliest possible moment.
Which does rather make you wonder about the expensive lawyers that are often used in these cases - are they simply taking fees from idiots, rather than advising them?
There is a reason the Conservative/LD coalition worked well. There isn't much difference between free marketeer Liberals and free marketeer Conservatives.
The Conservatives win elections by getting right wing liberals to vote for them as an integral part of the party. But yes, if someone like you was Tory leader I'd certainly be tempted to vote for the Lib Dems instead.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1326152507006083072
The behaviour of the Bluekippers are persuading me that Scotland and N Ireland are best served by leaving the UK.
BTW - I have the atheist bit all sorted out
As for the monarchy - a historic relic that still poisons English society by providing a framework for the wretched "Class system" and its associated attitudes. It needs to go.
https://twitter.com/toadmeister/status/1326153453484249088?s=19
Funny how you love polls when it says what you want, but ignore those that are inconvenient.
And yet... people who defend themselves in court famously do not do well?
"According to figures released by Andy Slaughter, the shadow legal aid minister, of the 25,500 incapacity benefit cases in 2009/10, some 60% of people without legal representation lost, compared with just 33% of those who had lawyers."
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-12578577
That to me speaks to a broken system.
One way of fixing it, is to spend a lot of money making sure each side can afford similarly well trained lawyers.
That does seem quite wasteful though. Another way might be to scrap the adversarial system?
Notwithstanding the issues with Betfair's rules that mean even if he did die on 19 January then Biden would still have been the winner.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/21/conservative-party-slammed-quietly-reinstating-councillor-made-anti-muslim-comments-11197712/
https://www.newsweek.com/islam-islamophobia-conservatives-boris-johnson-equality-labour-party-ehrc-muslim-1538553
Also no surprise that you immediately reach for whataboutery - a sure sign you haven't got a leg to stand on.
https://www.businessinsider.de/international/boris-johnson-islam-is-the-problem-and-islamophobia-is-a-natural-reaction-2018-8/?r=US&IR=T
what about the time Johnson said:
“All right, I say, the fate of Srebrenica was appalling. But they weren’t exactly angels, these Muslims.”
or
http://www.islamophobiawatch.co.uk/back-boris-urges-bnp/
As you yourself have admitted you would happily vote for the LDs not the Tories in all circumstances
I remember when you were posting on here regularly as a "Better Off Out" poster.
Your arguments and style were embarrassing then and are no less embarrassing now.
Yes, interesting idea to take the rhetorical combat out of it. You'd lose something but maybe you'd gain more. I don't know.
It's surprisingly easy to build. The app itself does absolutely nothing apart from sending you a bill every few weeks.
Link 2: Warsi is an extremist herself.
Link 3: Johnson was entirely 100% correct in what he said. Try reading his actual damn article and critiquing it point by point if you think he was wrong. It was a very well written, considered article.
Srebenica quote: It was sarcasm you fool, entirely within context of the article which you'd know if you'd actually bothered to read that article either.
So you have no leg to stand on.
So yes - bullshit.
I managed to convert a raving right wing Brexiteer friend to a raving namby pamby Remainer liberal friend.
Then everything changed.
When I looked at the argument in depth, it became clear that BOO was not going to work well and I changed my position (as per the quote from J M Keynes).
I have not been driven mad by Brexit - why should I? I am immune to Brexit thanks to my Irish citizenship. It is the Leavers who are going mad because their pet project is not going to plan. They are the ones running around blaming anyone and anything.
1. Take ANY statement by Boris Johnson that includes the words "Muslims"
eg "“All right, I say, the fate of Srebrenica was appalling. But they weren’t exactly angels, these Muslims.”
2. If you find yourself thinking "well, he's got a point" replace the word "Muslims" with "Jews".
3. See how it sounds. (You might have to replace other bits so it makes sense - eg "Srebenica" with a situation where Jews were slaughtered.)
NB: This doesn't work if you are an anti-semite.
a) Are these 'And's or 'Or's in the requirement list (or maybe any 2 out of 3)
b) Is there a hierarchy regarding religious beliefs
Wait?
WHAT?
I need a lie down.
Lawyers are awesome, lawyers have changed the world for good.
Gandhi, Thatcher, Ken Clarke, Clarence Darrow, and Atticus Finch, top eggs.
People are gradually coming round to my way of thinking on this Woke nonsense, including a high number of minorities - my wife's Sikh boss at Siemens went on a rant about how ludicrous it all was on her team meeting this morning.
I expect to be mocked for it relentlessly and then, once the zeitgeist is up, the same people will argue they really agreed with me all along.
Those who are able to demonstrate they have their own independent minds with the courage of their convictions will win my respect.
Sounds like the defences of Trump's shit: "it was a joke"
PS those words (which he was setting up for Bianca to demolish) weren't his words, they were the arguments the Serbs were using which he was deliberately getting demolished in response. Which you would have known if you had actually read the article.
I think you can find this motif throughout society. Its obviously more enraging when your class and schooling means you would have previously benefited. But now Johnson has further tightened the field. Only those with two degrees of separation or less may apply.
Do you know what the point was? Have you bothered to read the article?
Johnson was saying the opposite of what you think he was saying. You just clearly don't know that as you've clearly copied and pasted that from someone else and not put any thought into it whatsoever. What Johnson was writing was attacking non-intervention and attacking letting the Muslims in Srebenica die. He set up the straw man in an interview for that straw man to be demolished. Those were not his thoughts, they were clearly a question being asked giving a platform to reply, it is an interview technique not a joke.
Why would I take that seriously or want to engage with it?