Nice to see the Labour Manifesto being so carefully filleted, analysed, dissected and disembowelled by so many on here. I'm sure the LD manifesto will get the same treatment later on today.
From the start, I've considered May as less Thatcher's daughter than Heseltine's or possibly Heath's and the more we see of May's Conservative vision (and it's not social conservatism), the more I see the influence of Heseltine.
I'd go further - May's vision is more akin to British-style social democracy but rather the David Owen flavour than the Shirley Williams brand. There's nothing in anything May has said that wasn't said by Heseltine or Owen or others. Indeed, some of her policy ideas could and have come from Labour. The Coalition was accused by some of being a Lib Dem Government headed by a Conservative - perhaps we will now see a Labour Government headed by a Conservative.
The interventionist role of the State is the key - unlike Labour which sees the State itself as the mechanism for change, Heseltine/Owen/May see the State as enforcer of legislation as that mechanism so the next five years will see social change and engineering via legislation compelling businesses and local authorities and individuals to change.
It's a million miles away from the laissez-faire, "let the markets do the work" of Thatcher.
Not that any of this matters that much for now - the core of May's appeal is simply her ability to play to uncertainty and anxiety. Whether or not you think it's the right road to be on, the path out the EU and into what looks an uncertain future creates a desire among many for stability, safety and security even if all you want is to hide under the bed until it's all over.
Then there's Jeremy Corbyn who I think has performed pretty well in the campaign thus far. The truth is for a myriad of reasons he is not seen as the provider of that stability, safety and security whether your problem is with him, his policies, the company he keeps or the company he has kept and for many it's the full Lucky 15.
The other problem is this is not an election for optimism, positive messages and hope. I think, were we in that world, May would struggle and I think her biggest problem won't be if the A50 negotiations fail but if they succeed and things start going well and people start looking for a different style of leadership for the 2020s because she's no Blair in that regard or rather others can play that role better.
Trump may have had a disastrous start but he "lost his losers early". He had all of his crisis early on, while his supporters were still celebrating. While all of this is damaging lots of the people who backed him don't care or don't believe the MSM. Those who want him out need a smoking gun, which they don't have right now
What makes you think he has had his crisis early, do you see any signs that it will not continue? It's only 4 months in out of 4 years, give him time.
Exactly. The whole point is that it's crisis after crisis with Trump adminstration. As if this is the end of it!
Phrases of the campaign for me 'a reckoning' and 'we are being put on trial'
I dunno about you, but I'm looking forward to Dimbleby revealing all with the bong at ten.
Is he doing it again? That reveal is set to be awesome, I wonder how many times it'll be posted here on PB in those few seconds after the exit poll comes up.... 20? Plus of course the range of expletives we all enjoyed when the last one came out....
I think so, his last hurrah! I remember having a couple-minute moratorium on refreshing PB because of the one min delay on the iPlayer feed!
I believe it is the ideal time to reveal an AV thread here on the second bong.... actually I'd suggest a simple thread header using this tweet.
Phrases of the campaign for me 'a reckoning' and 'we are being put on trial'
I dunno about you, but I'm looking forward to Dimbleby revealing all with the bong at ten.
Is he doing it again? That reveal is set to be awesome, I wonder how many times it'll be posted here on PB in those few seconds after the exit poll comes up.... 20? Plus of course the range of expletives we all enjoyed when the last one came out....
I think so, his last hurrah! I remember having a couple-minute moratorium on refreshing PB because of the one min delay on the iPlayer feed!
I believe it is the ideal time to reveal an AV thread here on the second bong.... actually I'd suggest a simple thread header using this tweet.
I knew this set of clowns would be a shambles, but I had no idea it was going to be this appalling.
A forlorn hope: but maybe when all this over, the left will just get a tiny glimmer of appreciation for the basic professionalism of Blair, Brown, Campbell, Gould etc.
For all the job of senior mp is derided, turns out it can actually be pretty hard. Who knew?
On another matter, yet more talk of may and Hammond rowing on guido, someone has been briefing against him for months, trailing that he will be sacked etc. The days of harmony between number 10 and 11 is over.
Guido is a site that has always favoured a diamond hard Brexit. Hammond is a sensible, pragmatic politician, so naturally is opposed to this. Guido is gunning for him. After the GE, you can expect this Hammond attacks to become a commonplace of the mainstream, anti-European press. Will May stand up to them? Hmmm.
I guess to really boost their numbers the LDs would have hoped that people despairing of Corbyn, and knowing the Tories would win anyway, would cite en masses for the LDs instead. However what is happening is those people are saying they'll stick with labour, if the polls have it right.
The activists hate the Tories so much that they cant bring themselves to attack labour or if they do its only halfheartedly. Knocking on known LibDem supporters doors over the last week there are many really disillusioned with the campaign and direction the party is taking. I wouldnt be surprised if the Tories hold onto all their seats in SW london and also win Richmond and C&W. The Tories are picking up a huge amt of soft Labour supporters,all the LD leave vote and obviously most of the UKIP vote. Tory remainers by and large arent going anywhere
I knew this set of clowns would be a shambles, but I had no idea it was going to be this appalling.
A forlorn hope: but maybe when all this over, the left will just get a tiny glimmer of appreciation for the basic professionalism of Blair, Brown, Campbell, Gould etc.
For all the job of senior mp is derided, turns out it can actually be pretty hard. Who knew?
On another matter, yet more talk of may and Hammond rowing on guido, someone has been briefing against him for months, trailing that he will be sacked etc. The days of harmony between number 10 and 11 is over.
Guido is a site that has always favoured a diamond hard Brexit. Hammond is a sensible, pragmatic politician, so naturally is opposed to this. Guido is gunning for him. After the GE, you can expect this Hammond attacks to become a commonplace of the mainstream, anti-European press. Will May stand up to them? Hmmm.
I am seeing the return of Gove to high cabinet rank in mid June
I do find the LD position on the referendum incoherent. Do they approve of referenda? They must do or else they wouldn't be suggesting another one. But it seems they only approve of the 'right' answer.
My experience is that most Remain voters didn't like the result but they have accepted it. Thus Tim is fishing in a pool of not 48% but much less, and that pool is drying up as time goes on.
Mr. HYUFD, does the Lib Dem manifesto include a third EU referendum, just in case the voters get the second one wrong?
We'd have been better off going single market/EEA. It wouldn't have won over the hardcore leavers/people who are concerned madly about immigration but there's a definite constituency for it rather than full fat EU. Sturgeon took this path, and I think she was correct.
Mr. HYUFD, does the Lib Dem manifesto include a third EU referendum, just in case the voters get the second one wrong?
We'd have been better off going single market/EEA. It wouldn't have won over the hardcore leavers/people who are concerned madly about immigration but there's a definite constituency for it rather than full fat EU. Sturgeon took this path, and I think she was correct.
Obviously Sturgeon has other issues outwith the EU - but independence is not on the Lib Dem radar !
I am curious to see the LD manifesto - the Labour one was 50% larger this time than last, and IIRC the last LD one was pretty darn long, larger than the others. I feel like theirs should be shorter, punchier and highly focused to enable its messages to get out there easier.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
As it seems Conservative ambitions on Labour seats know no bounds, there's always the thought of East Ham turning blue.
Stephen Timms sits atop a small 34,252 majority which in the current climate must make this seat a hyper-marginal.
We have seven runners and riders for the East Ham General Election Handicap open to three year olds of all ages:
Stephen Timms - Labour - won 78% of the vote last time and achieved a 5% swing from the Conservatives which, had it been repeated country wide, would have left us in a very different place politically. He's a strong REMAIN supporter but no friend of Corbyn. He might get a senior position in a Cooper Shadow Cabinet or perhaps be a contender himself is Labour go sub-100.
Kirsty Finlayson - Conservative - from her Twitter feed, a highly enthusiastic activist who does a lot of canvassing, most of it in other seats. I suspect we may see some High Street activity on one or two of the last weekends but there are more likely targets in Ilford North and perhaps Dagenham & Rainham. In 1997 and 2001, the Conservatives got 16% but given the borough only went REMAIN 52-48, there may be some scope for upside. I'd be surprised if she got 20% - 15% seems reasonable as a benchmark.
Daniel Oxley - UKIP - third last time with 5% but UKIP have never done much outside Beckton and I suspect a lost deposit on the cards.
Chiti Obi-Obihara - Green - the Greens came fourth with 2.5% last time. They might advance again and finish third.
Glanville Williams - Lib Dem - fifth with just 1.6% of the vote in 2015 was awful. The immediate priority must be to save the deposit and it's fair to say with an influx of new members since 2015 the local party is stronger than it's been for a while. Might make 5% but in a scrap for third with the Greens.
Choudhry Afzal - Friends Party - they were formed in November 2016. It's very difficult to tell what their policies are but they seem to be of the legal profession and are orientated toward the Pakistani community which won't help so much in Tamil East Ham.
MIrza Zillur Rahman - Independent - another immigration lawyer. He thoughtfully told the Newham Recorder (the local rag) quite a bit so I'll simply provide the link:
Mr. HYUFD, I'm not sure a Brussels National Party will do well in the UK.
Mr. Pulpstar, certainly a credible position. A shame that many hardcore Remain supporters tried to frustrate the referendum result rather than channel it in the direction you suggest.
Mr. CD13, I agree entirely. The Lib Dem position is foolish. If only a wise man, perhaps decked in lace and bells, had warned that Lamb would be a much better leader than Farron.
The Lib Dems' failure to advance at the expense of Labour is a mystery.
Not really. They aren't attacking Labour. They're attacking the Tories. They're letting their natural lefty hearts overwhelm their tactical heads. Badmouthing Mrs May feels better. But it'll get them nowhere. If they had a head they'd be seeking to displace Labour as the party of the centre left. But they're fuckwits. It's an open goal left completely unmolested.
They are demonstrating one of the many downsides of virtue signalling.
Fighting the baby-eaters will increase their chances of sainthood but at the expense of electoral logic.
Is it really that surprising about support. Main thrust repeal brexit only 22% of people support this. Manifesto includes sort of costed proposals. Well that's fine if you have any chance of forming a gov but they don't, and labour have stolen their clothing by producing a sixth form wish list manifesto. Today's focus is young people. Who exactly are they targeting at? Teachers
Tories just cannot break that 50% barrier can they?
There are some people who think that if these were to be the actual results, May should have to form a coalition!
On all but the purest forms of PR, the Tories would probably win an absolute majority on these shares. Minor parties missing formal or implied thresholds reduces the share needed to win outright from 50 to mid- to high-40s. The SNP in 2011, for example, won an outright majority under AMS on a 44% regional vote and 45.4% constituency vote.
Under AV, which tends to exaggerate large majorities, the Tories could easily be heading towards a 200+ majority.
The Lib Dems' failure to advance at the expense of Labour is a mystery.
Not really. They aren't attacking Labour. They're attacking the Tories. They're letting their natural lefty hearts overwhelm their tactical heads. Badmouthing Mrs May feels better. But it'll get them nowhere. If they had a head they'd be seeking to displace Labour as the party of the centre left. But they're fuckwits. It's an open goal left completely unmolested.
I think they were starting from the premise that the fundamental if modest objective was to win back between say a quarter and a third of the seats they lost two years ago, then by definition this would have to be principally at the Tories' expense. Hence the Blue Team became their No.1 enemy. Plus, just like the Greens, UKIP, Plaid, etc, they have inevitably been squeezed by an election which was always going to be seen as a battle between the two major parties. Were they to stand still this time or possibly even go backwards, their best hope going forward would be to link up with the centre left faction of the Labour party as they did 40 years ago.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
As it seems Conservative ambitions on Labour seats know no bounds, there's always the thought of East Ham turning blue.
Stephen Timms sits atop a small 34,252 majority which in the current climate must make this seat a hyper-marginal.
We have seven runners and riders for the East Ham General Election Handicap open to three year olds of all ages:
Stephen Timms - Labour - won 78% of the vote last time and achieved a 5% swing from the Conservatives which, had it been repeated country wide, would have left us in a very different place politically. He's a strong REMAIN supporter but no friend of Corbyn. He might get a senior position in a Cooper Shadow Cabinet or perhaps be a contender himself is Labour go sub-100.
Kirsty Finlayson - Conservative - from her Twitter feed, a highly enthusiastic activist who does a lot of canvassing, most of it in other seats. I suspect we may see some High Street activity on one or two of the last weekends but there are more likely targets in Ilford North and perhaps Dagenham & Rainham. In 1997 and 2001, the Conservatives got 16% but given the borough only went REMAIN 52-48, there may be some scope for upside. I'd be surprised if she got 20% - 15% seems reasonable as a benchmark.
Daniel Oxley - UKIP - third last time with 5% but UKIP have never done much outside Beckton and I suspect a lost deposit on the cards.
Chiti Obi-Obihara - Green - the Greens came fourth with 2.5% last time. They might advance again and finish third.
Glanville Williams - Lib Dem - fifth with just 1.6% of the vote in 2015 was awful. The immediate priority must be to save the deposit and it's fair to say with an influx of new members since 2015 the local party is stronger than it's been for a while. Might make 5% but in a scrap for third with the Greens.
Choudhry Afzal - Friends Party - they were formed in November 2016. It's very difficult to tell what their policies are but they seem to be of the legal profession and are orientated toward the Pakistani community which won't help so much in Tamil East Ham.
MIrza Zillur Rahman - Independent - another immigration lawyer. He thoughtfully told the Newham Recorder (the local rag) quite a bit so I'll simply provide the link:
Ambition may no know bounds, but reality does - it was notable the reaction to the Skinner/Watson rumours from many was basically 'That would be fantastic, but Idoubt it'
Mr. HYUFD, I'm not sure a Brussels National Party will do well in the UK.
Mr. Pulpstar, certainly a credible position. A shame that many hardcore Remain supporters tried to frustrate the referendum result rather than channel it in the direction you suggest.
Mr. CD13, I agree entirely. The Lib Dem position is foolish. If only a wise man, perhaps decked in lace and bells, had warned that Lamb would be a much better leader than Farron.
About 20 to 25% of voters are hard-core Remainers so it is not totally implausible I also doubt Lamb would have done any better, indeed he may well lose his seat to the Tories
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
Talent in a politician is being able to change the argument so people agree with you. To move forward, to win.
Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, Harold Wilson, David Cameron all had different programs - but all meet the definition of 'talented' in my opinion. Also Jo Grimmond steadied the liberal ship and started moving the party forward from the absolute wilderness, this is Farron's task but he is more Clement Davies I fear.
Corbyn is sub Foot, and Paul Nuttall is taking UKIP back to the rump levels of the BNP vote.
Theresa May will be judged on not just this election but how her government and EU negotiation turns out.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
I do wish people would stop describing Usain Bolt as talented, he's not (subject to 'negotiation'...)
I think in some ways Farage is a talented/effective politician and I normally didn't agree with what he says.
Mr. HYUFD, does the Lib Dem manifesto include a third EU referendum, just in case the voters get the second one wrong?
We'd have been better off going single market/EEA. It wouldn't have won over the hardcore leavers/people who are concerned madly about immigration but there's a definite constituency for it rather than full fat EU. Sturgeon took this path, and I think she was correct.
Obviously Sturgeon has other issues outwith the EU - but independence is not on the Lib Dem radar !
37% of SNP voters voted Leave though compared to less than a third of LDs
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Sandwell voted heavily leave yes, but look at the recent Metro Mayor vote there. Even with the John Lewis candidate v Sion Simon, the Tories did not win over the area. Don't get me wrong if Watson is in trouble great and 14/1 for Casino Royale are good odds - hope it comes in.
Hopefully the rumours continue, so I can bet on Watson.
It'll be fun how The Evening Standard reports the Ipsos MORI poll today.
Main Headline - "Tory Poll Shock"
Story - "Prime Minister May has failed to improve the Conservative poll position as a new Ipsos Mori poll for the Evening Standard shows the Conservative Party has once again failed to break the significant 50% threshold ..... "
The Lib Dems' failure to advance at the expense of Labour is a mystery.
Not really. They aren't attacking Labour. They're attacking the Tories. They're letting their natural lefty hearts overwhelm their tactical heads. Badmouthing Mrs May feels better. But it'll get them nowhere. If they had a head they'd be seeking to displace Labour as the party of the centre left. But they're fuckwits. It's an open goal left completely unmolested.
I think they were starting from the premise that the fundamental if modest objective was to win back between say a quarter and a third of the seats they lost two years ago, then by definition this would have to be principally at the Tories' expense. Hence the Blue Team became their No.1 enemy. Plus, just like the Greens, UKIP, Plaid, etc, they have inevitably been squeezed by an election which was always going to be seen as a battle between the two major parties. Were they to stand still this time or possibly even go backwards, their best hope going forward would be to link up with the centre left faction of the Labour party as they did 40 years ago.
It's also a self fulfilling prophecy for the LibDems. Their greatly diminished state since 2015 has meant that they receive much less coverage, having to defer to the SNP as the third party, for example. Less coverage means less opportunity to make an impact. When they do get attention they just babble about an undefined hard Brexit and a second referendum. It just makes them look whiney and anti-democratic. Their surge has certainly crash landed on the runway.
IMO they could build their policy around two things.
accept the referendum and leave the EU rejoin EFTA and stay in the single market
Rather than using 'disastrous hard Brexit' as a meaningless soundbite they could then try to explain the positive importance of single market membership and the dangers of leaving it.
Mr. HYUFD, does the Lib Dem manifesto include a third EU referendum, just in case the voters get the second one wrong?
We'd have been better off going single market/EEA. It wouldn't have won over the hardcore leavers/people who are concerned madly about immigration but there's a definite constituency for it rather than full fat EU. Sturgeon took this path, and I think she was correct.
Obviously Sturgeon has other issues outwith the EU - but independence is not on the Lib Dem radar !
37% of SNP voters voted Leave though compared to less than a third of LDs
That doesn't matter. There are alot of 2010 Lib Dem -> Tory switchers in the Southwest. With quite alot of leavers amongst them. There is massive scope to be more continuity pro Europe than the ultra remain position Farron has manoeuvred into. I think the leave flank has almost entirely vanished from the Lib Dems now. And no wonder.
Re nationalisation using borrowings - if Quantitive Easing was good why not use it for nationalisation ?
"The Committee also voted unanimously to maintain the stock of UK government bond purchases, financed by the issuance of central bank reserves, at £435 billion. " Bank of England monetary Policy minutes
There is a concern about BoE independence - but this is what Richard Murphy suggests I think.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
Well I neither like nor respect Tony Blair, but I can see very clearly that he was an extremely talented political operator. Who has since gone a bit bonkers.
On topic, the value to me looks to be clearly with 2019.
US politicians do not begin impeachment charges lightly. The fact that Trump has already taken several actions that might, in some circumstances, have led to impeachment proceedings being commenced and the fact that none has been started should give some indication that he'll be given rope.
I suspect that after the surprise to many on the Hill of Trump's victory, they're also a little wary of taking on someone they've found hard to read or understand, and whose appeal in the country they're unsure how to counter - though they'd be right to conclude that DC game-playing isn't the way. For now, the legitimacy conferred by election on Trump's methods overrides politically legal niceties. That may sound abhorrent to those who believe in constitutional government - as indeed it should - but it remains the political dynamic all the same.
That may change before 2018. Indeed, it seems to me highly likely that the American population will become bored with a blusterer who can't deliver on what he promised and acts like a self-indulgent fool. Even so, I expect the turning point to be the mid-terms.
If the Dems win the House - quite likely, even given current districting - that places a huge amount of power to subpoena and to initiate actions in their hands. A Dem win would also end or at least seriously diminish the mandate which is currently his political shield. Republicans who don't like him, don't like his methods, don't like (some of) his policies and - above all - don't like the electoral damage he'd be doing would have good reason not to die in a ditch to defend the indefensible.
I knew this set of clowns would be a shambles, but I had no idea it was going to be this appalling.
A forlorn hope: but maybe when all this over, the left will just get a tiny glimmer of appreciation for the basic professionalism of Blair, Brown, Campbell, Gould etc.
For all the job of senior mp is derided, turns out it can actually be pretty hard. Who knew?
On another matter, yet more talk of may and Hammond rowing on guido, someone has been briefing against him for months, trailing that he will be sacked etc. The days of harmony between number 10 and 11 is over.
Winning an election is hard. Really hard. Win as the Labour party is really, really hard. This was one of Blair's basic insights. What you have to win as Labour. Look at the record. In 80 years there have been 3, yes only 3, election-winning Labour PMs and two of them are dead.
Very true rare events under any circumstances Labour Election victories.Labour has really only won one shock victory since 1945 and that was Feb 1974 .Blair was correct and was nervous about ever winning successive elections even after landslide in ,97..They were timid even with only the opposition of the fourth estate to consider.There will be no shock this time just a 150 conservative majority with no concerns over the press .
On topic I had a modest position on Trump not out in 2017, which I laid off for ~ £3 Gross loss. Run your winners and cut your losers, and also if there's going to be a rush to the exits head out first !
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
You seem to be whipping up a dispute out of thin air here, and you are wrong. To say that Blair, Mandelson, Cameron were talented politicians is perfectly correct and informative English. Your counter-examples are wrong, too. Mozart and Van Gogh were way above talented, and Bolt is just at the extreme end of a physiological bell curve.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
.
I'm not confusing anything - you said you wish people would stop describing politicians as talented, then made comparisons to notable geniuses in their fields, as if if one falls short of absolute genius one cannot be talented, which is bollocks. You then said when people describe a politician as talented they mean they agree with what they say, assuming that's the only reason someone would say a politician is talented, which is also bollocks. Additionally, like and respect do not need to go together - it is easy to respect politicians we do not like as well. Heck, the formidible nature of SNP politicians has been a great distress for me.
Some politicians are talented, that is a fact. Some very talented, some moderately talented. Some have very little talent. But it means the idea we should not be able to describe some as talented, which was what apparently irritated you, is a nonsense. More than that, it's just lazy.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Mr. HYUFD, I'm not sure a Brussels National Party will do well in the UK.
Mr. Pulpstar, certainly a credible position. A shame that many hardcore Remain supporters tried to frustrate the referendum result rather than channel it in the direction you suggest.
Mr. CD13, I agree entirely. The Lib Dem position is foolish. If only a wise man, perhaps decked in lace and bells, had warned that Lamb would be a much better leader than Farron.
Quite, Mr.D. While no messiah, he's far better than the Farron homunculus. And I suspect that a message which included 'I don't like the Tories, but I successfully worked with them in government' might have been quite an effective one in this particular election compared with the shrill insurgency of Farron.
Fantastic numbers really. Unemployment down, well into "full employment" territory whilst economic inactivity also down. Pay up 2.4% which for the last three months means a real-terms rise. That can't last but it will keep the pain down.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Great leadership, in politics, management, and many other fields, is one of those things that, when you truly see it, can have amazing impacts, even as many fall way short and others claim their leaders have it when they do not.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
.
I'm not confusing anything - you said you wish people would stop describing politicians as talented, then made comparisons to notable geniuses in their fields, as if if one falls short of absolute genius one cannot be talented, which is bollocks. You then said when people describe a politician as talented they mean they agree with what they say, assuming that's the only reason someone would say a politician is talented, which is also bollocks. Additionally, like and respect do not need to go together - it is easy to respect politicians we do not like as well. Heck, the formidible nature of SNP politicians has been a great distress for me.
Some politicians are talented, that is a fact. Some very talented, some moderately talented. Some have very little talent. But it means the idea we should not be able to describe some as talented, which was what apparently irritated you, is a nonsense.
And c**t and talented are not opposites and not mutually exclusive. Lots of talented c**ts around. Everyone in the Beatles frinstance.
It'll be fun how The Evening Standard reports the Ipsos MORI poll today.
Main Headline - "Tory Poll Shock"
Story - "Prime Minister May has failed to improve the Conservative poll position as a new Ipsos Mori poll for the Evening Standard shows the Conservative Party has once again failed to break the significant 50% threshold ..... "
Well the Standard, now run by that arch May hater, Osborne, will headline any disparaging of Mrs. May it can; even if in means damaging his own party. What a wanker!
On all but the purest forms of PR, the Tories would probably win an absolute majority on these shares. Minor parties missing formal or implied thresholds reduces the share needed to win outright from 50 to mid- to high-40s. The SNP in 2011, for example, won an outright majority under AMS on a 44% regional vote and 45.4% constituency vote.
Under AV, which tends to exaggerate large majorities, the Tories could easily be heading towards a 200+ majority.
AMS is my favoured option for UK elections.
The system maintains a strong constituency link, with a high degree of proportionality and a reasonable prospect of a majority government.
Trump may have had a disastrous start but he "lost his losers early". He had all of his crisis early on, while his supporters were still celebrating. While all of this is damaging lots of the people who backed him don't care or don't believe the MSM. Those who want him out need a smoking gun, which they don't have right now
Welcome to PB Mr Chadwick. If Trump were playing a Bridge hand I suspect he wouldn't "lose his losers first". He'd throw his cards on the table, claim all thirteen tricks, then stand up and walk away. His opponents would enjoy their moral victory, but the game would be over.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Yep, Sir Winston Churchill achieved far more than winning any General Election. He massively helped win a World War - no other 20th Century British politician comes close to that.
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Surely talent is often relative.
Mrs May is talented but clearly not a great public speaker nor a quick on her feet thinker nor a great administrator. She does have a great ability to bide her time before acting. . But when you consider her opposition in Labour and the LDs and UKIP and the Greens, she does not need a great deal of talent as the opposition has virtually none between them....
Hmm..... should I get PB Tory shaved in to my head....
strokes chin(s)....
When May comes to true power (not constrained by small majorities), everyone will have their political affiliation shaved into the heads - saves time on political debate when their allegiance is clear at a glance.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Yep, Sir Winston Churchill achieved far more than winning any General Election. He massively helped win a World War - no other 20th Century British politician comes close to that.
On topic, the value to me looks to be clearly with 2019.
US politicians do not begin impeachment charges lightly. The fact that Trump has already taken several actions that might, in some circumstances, have led to impeachment proceedings being commenced and the fact that none has been started should give some indication that he'll be given rope.
I suspect that after the surprise to many on the Hill of Trump's victory, they're also a little wary of taking on someone they've found hard to read or understand, and whose appeal in the country they're unsure how to counter - though they'd be right to conclude that DC game-playing isn't the way. For now, the legitimacy conferred by election on Trump's methods overrides politically legal niceties. That may sound abhorrent to those who believe in constitutional government - as indeed it should - but it remains the political dynamic all the same.
That may change before 2018. Indeed, it seems to me highly likely that the American population will become bored with a blusterer who can't deliver on what he promised and acts like a self-indulgent fool. Even so, I expect the turning point to be the mid-terms.
If the Dems win the House - quite likely, even given current districting - that places a huge amount of power to subpoena and to initiate actions in their hands. A Dem win would also end or at least seriously diminish the mandate which is currently his political shield. Republicans who don't like him, don't like his methods, don't like (some of) his policies and - above all - don't like the electoral damage he'd be doing would have good reason not to die in a ditch to defend the indefensible.
6/1 or so for 2019 looks long.
Reasonable arguments, but it does seem that there is a certain momentum developing. It might peter out, but if not, it would be extremely convenient for Republican congresspersons fretting over current opinion polls and their re-election prospects to get rid of Trump this year. 2018 is perhaps more unlikely than 2019.
Hmm..... should I get PB Tory shaved in to my head....
strokes chin(s)....
When May comes to true power (not constrained by small majorities), everyone will have their political affiliation shaved into the heads - saves time on political debate when their allegiance is clear at a glance.
Soon May will seep away the last remnants of the old republic....
I do wish people on here would stop describing politicians as talented, they're not. Mozart was, so was Van Gogh, Usain Bolt etc, talent isn't up for negotiation its there for all to see.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
A rather harsh view. Politicians can good speakers, good at managing administrations, good at coming up with policies, and yes, good at politics, there's nothing wrong with using the world talent to describe that if they possess high skills, just because they are not a Mozart or Van Gogh.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
You're confusing "like and respect" with talent. Talent is indisputable, its not subjective. Take Farage, plenty say he's a talented orator, others say he's a c**t, its opinion.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
Well I neither like nor respect Tony Blair, but I can see very clearly that he was an extremely talented political operator. Who has since gone a bit bonkers.
A lot of Blair's toxicity is a result of his post-PM career, remarkably.
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Yep, Sir Winston Churchill achieved far more than winning any General Election. He massively helped win a World War - no other 20th Century British politician comes close to that.
Lloyd George says hello.
With Asquith as his PM - the virtues of claition government :>
It'll be fun how The Evening Standard reports the Ipsos MORI poll today.
Main Headline - "Tory Poll Shock"
Story - "Prime Minister May has failed to improve the Conservative poll position as a new Ipsos Mori poll for the Evening Standard shows the Conservative Party has once again failed to break the significant 50% threshold ..... "
Well the Standard, now run by that arch May hater, Osborne, will headline any disparaging of Mrs. May it can; even if in means damaging his own party. What a wanker!
Steady that's a serious offence around here with the blessed George....
The greatest politicians can, by their own efforts, decisions and leadership, save entire countries from disaster. That is a rather more useful talent than painting pictures.
Yep, Sir Winston Churchill achieved far more than winning any General Election. He massively helped win a World War - no other 20th Century British politician comes close to that.
When May comes to true power (not constrained by small majorities), everyone will have their political affiliation shaved into the heads - saves time on political debate when their allegiance is clear at a glance.
There are none as blind as those who will not see.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
It's one reason, while of a certain usefulness, I find the idea of lumping people in left and right tribes is such nonsense. By doing so it conjures an image of perhaps broad tribes that generally agree with each other more than their opponents, when fact is the extreme folk and left and right, in behaviour and occasionally policy can be so divorced from supposed ideological underpinnings of others in their tribe it beggars belief, and really the ones in the middling area agree far more with one another, and more importantly are able to outside of partisan jibes to treat each other with respect, recognising we're arguing over politics here.
It's important, sometimes very important, but it is not That important.
When May comes to true power (not constrained by small majorities), everyone will have their political affiliation shaved into the heads - saves time on political debate when their allegiance is clear at a glance.
There are none as blind as those who will not see.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
The level of political discourse in the UK is so low these days. Over the past few weeks I have been binge watching past election nights on YouTube. Going back to the 1970s there was a politeness to most public interactions that puts the current generation to shame.
All sides are more guilty of rudeness and name calling than they used to be. But significant parts of the left do seem to have taken things to new extremes.
I don't hanker after much from my childhood but a little more respect from all politicians towards their rivals would not be a bad thing.
Bold, but encouraging. Promising not to into coalition with someone at local level is bloody stupid, whoever is being so rigid. It might not be easy, but sometimes its for the best, and given most areas of significant disagreement are from national concerns, should be considered.
There are none as blind as those who will not see.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
I pointed out on Twitter that the tax rate under labour for someone on £100k would be a personal marginal tax rate of 67% and was instantly set upon by Corybynistas as being a "Tory Abbott".... so I explained the maths and was then just told "well they can afford it" and that they'd love to earn that amount.
So there's no talent involved in being a politician?
Hmm...
Of course it's different to the skill of playing the piano, or the genes/training needed to run fast, but to say it's entirely opinions, and that people only view certain politicians as talented because they agree with them is flipping stoopid
When May comes to true power (not constrained by small majorities), everyone will have their political affiliation shaved into the heads - saves time on political debate when their allegiance is clear at a glance.
What of those who have no hair?
*waves to management
Enforced wigs, which shall then be strategically shaved.
There are none as blind as those who will not see.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
The level of political discourse in the UK is so low these days. Over the past few weeks I have been binge watching past election nights on YouTube. Going back to the 1970s there was a politeness to most public interactions that puts the current generation to shame.
All sides are more guilty of rudeness and name calling than they used to be. But significant parts of the left do seem to have taken things to new extremes.
I don't hanker after much from my childhood but a little more respect from all politicians towards their rivals would not be a bad thing.
Can't remember the last time loads of protesters were spitting at Labour politicians at their conference... just sayin.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
The Zoomers have the same problem.
Anyone not infatuated with the sainted Nicola is evil and must be crushed.
That's the "wooing" she promised us...
You call Scottish nationalists 'Zoomers'? I agree that Cybernats can be a bit ridiculous at times. The political groups which I find to be most annoying online are:
Corbynites/Trump supporters The UKippers/LEAVE EU types on twitter
Comments
If you voted Leave, then suck it up.
Don't you just love those words ....
Knocking on known LibDem supporters doors over the last week there are many really disillusioned with the campaign and direction the party is taking.
I wouldnt be surprised if the Tories hold onto all their seats in SW london and also win Richmond and C&W.
The Tories are picking up a huge amt of soft Labour supporters,all the LD leave vote and obviously most of the UKIP vote. Tory remainers by and large arent going anywhere
I do find the LD position on the referendum incoherent. Do they approve of referenda? They must do or else they wouldn't be suggesting another one. But it seems they only approve of the 'right' answer.
My experience is that most Remain voters didn't like the result but they have accepted it. Thus Tim is fishing in a pool of not 48% but much less, and that pool is drying up as time goes on.
Sturgeon took this path, and I think she was correct.
On here when somebody is described as talented it really means you agree with what they say, an entirely different thing.
Stephen Timms sits atop a small 34,252 majority which in the current climate must make this seat a hyper-marginal.
We have seven runners and riders for the East Ham General Election Handicap open to three year olds of all ages:
Stephen Timms - Labour - won 78% of the vote last time and achieved a 5% swing from the Conservatives which, had it been repeated country wide, would have left us in a very different place politically. He's a strong REMAIN supporter but no friend of Corbyn. He might get a senior position in a Cooper Shadow Cabinet or perhaps be a contender himself is Labour go sub-100.
Kirsty Finlayson - Conservative - from her Twitter feed, a highly enthusiastic activist who does a lot of canvassing, most of it in other seats. I suspect we may see some High Street activity on one or two of the last weekends but there are more likely targets in Ilford North and perhaps Dagenham & Rainham. In 1997 and 2001, the Conservatives got 16% but given the borough only went REMAIN 52-48, there may be some scope for upside. I'd be surprised if she got 20% - 15% seems reasonable as a benchmark.
Daniel Oxley - UKIP - third last time with 5% but UKIP have never done much outside Beckton and I suspect a lost deposit on the cards.
Chiti Obi-Obihara - Green - the Greens came fourth with 2.5% last time. They might advance again and finish third.
Glanville Williams - Lib Dem - fifth with just 1.6% of the vote in 2015 was awful. The immediate priority must be to save the deposit and it's fair to say with an influx of new members since 2015 the local party is stronger than it's been for a while. Might make 5% but in a scrap for third with the Greens.
Choudhry Afzal - Friends Party - they were formed in November 2016. It's very difficult to tell what their policies are but they seem to be of the legal profession and are orientated toward the Pakistani community which won't help so much in Tamil East Ham.
MIrza Zillur Rahman - Independent - another immigration lawyer. He thoughtfully told the Newham Recorder (the local rag) quite a bit so I'll simply provide the link:
http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/seasonal/election/election-2017-mirza-zillur-rahman-to-run-as-independent-candidate-in-east-ham-1-5013856
Mr. Pulpstar, certainly a credible position. A shame that many hardcore Remain supporters tried to frustrate the referendum result rather than channel it in the direction you suggest.
Mr. CD13, I agree entirely. The Lib Dem position is foolish. If only a wise man, perhaps decked in lace and bells, had warned that Lamb would be a much better leader than Farron.
Is it really that surprising about support. Main thrust repeal brexit only 22% of people support this. Manifesto includes sort of costed proposals. Well that's fine if you have any chance of forming a gov but they don't, and labour have stolen their clothing by producing a sixth form wish list manifesto. Today's focus is young people. Who exactly are they targeting at? Teachers
Under AV, which tends to exaggerate large majorities, the Tories could easily be heading towards a 200+ majority.
The significance of this is that Mike Pence headed the transition team.
Politicians choose to seek public office and public derision is part and parcel of the job, and of course there will be many people better at many things than the majority of MPs, but it is not impossible for them to be talented.
And no, talented does not mean people necessarily agree with a politician, I am sure loads of people on here could list MPs whom they fundamentally disagree on their politics but respect their intellects, motivations or general performance. It is both lazy and untrue to assume that people only ever praise the side they support. Normally they would not feel much need to advertise they quite like and respect an opposing politician of course, but that is not the same thing at all.
TBH I am beginning to find this Queen of the May thing irritating.
Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, Harold Wilson, David Cameron all had different programs - but all meet the definition of 'talented' in my opinion.
Also Jo Grimmond steadied the liberal ship and started moving the party forward from the absolute wilderness, this is Farron's task but he is more Clement Davies I fear.
Corbyn is sub Foot, and Paul Nuttall is taking UKIP back to the rump levels of the BNP vote.
Theresa May will be judged on not just this election but how her government and EU negotiation turns out.
I think in some ways Farage is a talented/effective politician and I normally didn't agree with what he says.
Only a fool would dispute Bolt is talented.
Story - "Prime Minister May has failed to improve the Conservative poll position as a new Ipsos Mori poll for the Evening Standard shows the Conservative Party has once again failed to break the significant 50% threshold ..... "
IMO they could build their policy around two things.
accept the referendum and leave the EU
rejoin EFTA and stay in the single market
Rather than using 'disastrous hard Brexit' as a meaningless soundbite they could then try to explain the positive importance of single market membership and the dangers of leaving it.
There is massive scope to be more continuity pro Europe than the ultra remain position Farron has manoeuvred into. I think the leave flank has almost entirely vanished from the Lib Dems now. And no wonder.
Who has since gone a bit bonkers.
US politicians do not begin impeachment charges lightly. The fact that Trump has already taken several actions that might, in some circumstances, have led to impeachment proceedings being commenced and the fact that none has been started should give some indication that he'll be given rope.
I suspect that after the surprise to many on the Hill of Trump's victory, they're also a little wary of taking on someone they've found hard to read or understand, and whose appeal in the country they're unsure how to counter - though they'd be right to conclude that DC game-playing isn't the way. For now, the legitimacy conferred by election on Trump's methods overrides politically legal niceties. That may sound abhorrent to those who believe in constitutional government - as indeed it should - but it remains the political dynamic all the same.
That may change before 2018. Indeed, it seems to me highly likely that the American population will become bored with a blusterer who can't deliver on what he promised and acts like a self-indulgent fool. Even so, I expect the turning point to be the mid-terms.
If the Dems win the House - quite likely, even given current districting - that places a huge amount of power to subpoena and to initiate actions in their hands. A Dem win would also end or at least seriously diminish the mandate which is currently his political shield. Republicans who don't like him, don't like his methods, don't like (some of) his policies and - above all - don't like the electoral damage he'd be doing would have good reason not to die in a ditch to defend the indefensible.
6/1 or so for 2019 looks long.
Run your winners and cut your losers, and also if there's going to be a rush to the exits head out first !
Some politicians are talented, that is a fact. Some very talented, some moderately talented. Some have very little talent. But it means the idea we should not be able to describe some as talented, which was what apparently irritated you, is a nonsense. More than that, it's just lazy.
https://twitter.com/jackhaines98/status/864496359231062016
While no messiah, he's far better than the Farron homunculus.
And I suspect that a message which included 'I don't like the Tories, but I successfully worked with them in government' might have been quite an effective one in this particular election compared with the shrill insurgency of Farron.
His speech to the house on Libya was top notch oratory. I'm struggling to think of anyone else on their benches quite honestly.
The system maintains a strong constituency link, with a high degree of proportionality and a reasonable prospect of a majority government.
strokes chin(s)....
Surely talent is often relative.
Mrs May is talented but clearly not a great public speaker nor a quick on her feet thinker nor a great administrator. She does have a great ability to bide her time before acting.
.
But when you consider her opposition in Labour and the LDs and UKIP and the Greens, she does not need a great deal of talent as the opposition has virtually none between them....
2018 is perhaps more unlikely than 2019.
Strong and stable leadership for Saffron Walden.
Surely something we can all get behind ?
https://twitter.com/katiecrosson/status/861968298828857344
There are none as blind as those who will not see.
I'm convinced that social media has been a disaster for my side of the political divide.
Also, the Corbynites on Twitter seem to think you're evil if you disagree with them....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk
Anyone not infatuated with the sainted Nicola is evil and must be crushed.
That's the "wooing" she promised us...
*waves to management
He wanted OGH shaved in ....
However .....
It's important, sometimes very important, but it is not That important.
All sides are more guilty of rudeness and name calling than they used to be. But significant parts of the left do seem to have taken things to new extremes.
I don't hanker after much from my childhood but a little more respect from all politicians towards their rivals would not be a bad thing.
Hmm...
Of course it's different to the skill of playing the piano, or the genes/training needed to run fast, but to say it's entirely opinions, and that people only view certain politicians as talented because they agree with them is flipping stoopid
Corbynites/Trump supporters
The UKippers/LEAVE EU types on twitter
These groups can't deal with disagreement.
The House of Commons will have direct control of the kingdom.