politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Just to confirm: Friday’s Pre-GE2017 gathering WILL be taking

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

SeanT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

Today? Really? Today???

After an attack on British kids? He's so sad and bitter he runs that fucking non-story?

What a c*nt. Your hero Osborne can go suck the pizzle of Satan. Ugh.

Seconded.

Black_Rook said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help:-



Exhibit 1 below: a vignette from September 2016 – the first formal day of the Conference.



9:46am: Corbyn tells Jewish peer who quit Labour over anti-Semitism to “reflect“.

9:56am: Corbyn says he backs war crimes investigations into British troops.

10:00am: Corbyn says he opposes giving more resources to MI6.

10:22am: McDonnell defends calling Esther McVey “a stain on humanity”.

10:40am: Yvette Cooper tells McDonnell to apologise.

11:06am: McDonnell doubles down, says “yes I do” think they were the right words.

11:15pm: Derek Hatton spotted in the conference hall.

11:52am: Ken Livingstone talks about Hitler on the BBC.

1:42am: Delegate rants about “Jewish MPs” and “Jewish plot to oust Corbyn”.

1:50pm: Fringe speaker compares Tory welfare policy to Nazis’ Arbeit Macht Frei.

5:00pm: Momentum host speaker call for a Jewish man’s throat to be cut.

5:25pm: Anti-war merchandise mocking injured British soldiers on sale.

6:00pm: Jackie Walker says anti-Semitism in Labour is “exaggerated“.

6:30pm: Leaflets circulated: “Jewish Labour Movement does not belong in Labour” at a meeting held to discuss anti-Semitism within the Labour party.



An

But they will. In huge numbers.

Millions. More than last time, probably.

What is GO thinking? 'Read Standard, get Corbyn'?

I think he needs to rethink his obvious massive gripe. You really can't play out your personal vendettas at the expense of the country.

Omnium said:

What is GO thinking? 'Read Standard, get Corbyn'?

I think he needs to rethink his obvious massive gripe. You really can't play out your personal vendettas at the expense of the country.

Every paper has to pitch to its readers

Omnium said:

What is GO thinking? 'Read Standard, get Corbyn'?

I think he needs to rethink his obvious massive gripe. You really can't play out your personal vendettas at the expense of the country.

Why not? When you don't care about anything other than yourself, it's easy.

Beverley_C said:

Alanbrooke said:

Beverley_C said:

Roger said:

Beverley_C said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

When is the next PB meet in Yorkshire? Cycling World Championships? A bit of a way off!

I'm hoping to arrange a PB meet in Manchester in October to coincide with the Tory conference.

It is a pity they demolished Tommy Ducks - you lot would have loved it, especially the "collection" nailed to the ceiling

That takes me back. women's knickers wasn't it?

Yes. However, for the avoidance of doubt, none of them belonged to me

I assume you go commando ?

You assume wrongly.

shame Roger and I regularly meet for commando weekends in Ludlow.

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

SeanT said:

Roger said:

Roger said:

I went to the Cannes film festival today and they had the British the French and the EU flags at half mast. It was quite moving. I think we're going to miss this solidarity more than we can imagine in the months and years ahead.

We don't put our flags at half mast when they have a bombing or shootings in Iraq or Libya or Israel or the US or Russia or Tunisia. It's something we do with those closest to us and something those close do to us.

What utter bollocks. We certainly stand in solidarity with the USA when they get hit.

Remember this? It had a significant impact, at the time. Perhaps one of the first examples of this international solidarity-signalling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwrX-LN9-L0

Perhaps you're right. But the Cannes Festival of all places which is hugely American-centric and where most Americans wouldn't have the faintest idea what it was all about made the gesture feel quite special.

Not particularly surprising now because that's what you do for your own but whether that's how they'll see us in the years ahead is anyone's guess.

Alanbrooke said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

spineless in Tatton

So many politicians have been willing to give it a go when they weren't the favourite - Wilson, Heath, Thatcher, Foot, Kinnock, Blair, Hague, IDS, EdM, Cameron and indeed May and Corbyn.

But Osborne wimped out.

And the man who Osborne's lack of courage and consequential bitterness reminds me of:

Gordon Brown

Though Brown did become PM in the end.

SeanT said:

Omnium said:

What is GO thinking? 'Read Standard, get Corbyn'?

I think he needs to rethink his obvious massive gripe. You really can't play out your personal vendettas at the expense of the country.

Indeed. I had a small, sneaking, guilty-pleasure admiration for Osborne until now. He was the smart, bohemian, funny one. But this desperate and very public assault on TMay is odious and demeaning. No sane professional editor would run that utter non story - posh twat artist makes a bunch of lame, unfunny posters. And they would NEVER run it today.

What a falling from grace is here.

Well it's an interesting career.

In 2010 I and others were very worried indeed about GO's qualifications to steer us out of violent waters. He did though, but only just about.

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

I'm reminded of when the people of Nice booed Hollande and Valls after the Promenade truck massacre. May's job as Home Secretary was and as PM is to keep the British public safe. Strong and stable my arse indeed.

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jason said:

Tony said:

Jason said:

Jason said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jason said:

Consider this nightmare scenario.

:


We could potentially end up going back a hundred years, at least in the short term. It's a horrifying thought, but let's not kid ourselves about this - if they could make this happen, they would.

No they fucking wouldn't.

Places like the Bank of England, the Stock Exchange all have off site back ups well away from London to stop the nightmare scenario you're fantasising about.

No, no, no, I'm not talking about physically blowing up computer servers. Stock markets can crash without someone unplugging a machine.

And it's hardly a fucking fantasy, now is it?

With all due respect , you don't have a clue what you're talking about
Servers for any large City organisation are typical hosted AWAY from the centre of London in at least 2 buildings a minimum of 30 miles apart. Data is replicated between both locations so the company can continue with limited impact should a site go down.

No, you misunderstand the point I'm trying to make. In the event of such a disastrous occurrence, stock markets the world over would crash, wiping trillions off stocks and commodities. I'm not necessarily talking about the physical damage, which would be immense anyway, but the massive psychological damage and commercial/business sentiment.

I'm really struggling to make it any simpler to understand than that.

It's because you're not aware of the controls in place to stop something like that happening.

They've already wargamed this into the system.

One oil company commissioned a report into what would happen if it's London HQ was completely destroyed (staff, records - the lot). The foolish consultants provided a report that said - no noticeable effect on world wide operations.

Strangely, no further work was commissioned to them from the London office....

Why, was it closed?

I still remember the look on one senior managers face - the moment he realised that he was being told (in 300 pages of detail) that he was a pointless waste of space.

A sensation I have had creep across me when talking to quite a number of senior managers, in fairness.

I think my favourite was the headmaster who got locked out of a classroom and had to send for backup...

felix said:

RoyalBlue said:

SeanT said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

Today? Really? Today???

After an attack on British kids? He's so sad and bitter he runs that fucking non-story?

What a c*nt. Your hero Osborne can go suck the pizzle of Satan. Ugh.

Seconded.

Yes it's very disappointing. he is bright, young enough to have had a great future and is behaving very much like a spoilt child. Such a waste but certainly it looks increasingly like one case where my faith in him was completely unfounded.

Osborne's a sad sack.

another_richard said:

Alanbrooke said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

spineless in Tatton

So many politicians have been willing to give it a go when they weren't the favourite - Wilson, Heath, Thatcher, Foot, Kinnock, Blair, Hague, IDS, EdM, Cameron and indeed May and Corbyn.

But Osborne wimped out.

And the man who Osborne's lack of courage and consequential bitterness reminds me of:

Gordon Brown

Though Brown did become PM in the end.

I would have said Blair, Heath and Wilson were all favourites in those particular contests with those electorates, although possibly not to the public at large given Brown, Maudling and Brown all had higher public profiles.

William Whitelaw was the one - overwhelming favourite to win and didn't even stand!

Aw, all the headbangers are upset because George Osborne is having fun at the Prime Minister's expense. He's grasped his new job's responsibilities early, which is to engage readers. Deference and obsequiousness would be hindrances, not assets.

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

What chance you think it's Overlord but it turns out to be Jubilee?

matt said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

What chance you think it's Overlord but it turns out to be Jubilee?

Dieppe

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

That is a risk they may not want to take, true, although I think given that Corbyn has been forced to 'clarify' his views on such things twice already it's quite possible it will come up of its own accord.

However that could conceivably be bad news for Corbyn, for it then begs the question of whether they might go for a different line of attack - his record in this highly unsavoury case, which to put it mildly is underwhelming and is back in the news in the last fortnight:

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington-kids-homes-scandal-shame-of-ex-mayor-sandy-marks-pro-paedophile-past-1-5012565

I think any party would be foolish to campaign on terrorism now. It risks looking ghoulish.

The media might do it for them, mind.

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Aw, all the headbangers are upset because George Osborne is having fun at the Prime Minister's expense. He's grasped his new job's responsibilities early, which is to engage readers. Deference and obsequiousness would be hindrances, not assets.

I'm a professional journalist, you're not. That story just screams "non story which furthers my editorial agenda", the kind of thing the Express or the Sun or the Mirror might, if they are really at a pinch, run on a very very slow news day, and hope that no one really notices, even if it has the desired subliminal impact.

On the day after the worst atrocity on British soil in a decade? When the Prime Minister, the PM he is so blatantly yet adolescently mocking, is asking her advisors how many kids died?

It's just shit journalism. Shit editing. Just a bit shit. Call me a pious hypocritical twat, but Osborne is certainly burning his bridges - Tories won't forget this.

Not sure it tops the Mirror story on Roger Moore...

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

He's an arselicker to Russian oligarchs now.

You should feel betrayed.

Nah, he's still a very young man, he's 45, Boris spent 7 years out of Parliament.

I suspect if you ever met him you'd like him.

Prediction: George Osborne will never be Prime Minister.

He could, in theory, become a grandee like Heseltine.

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

Don't attack over the IRA. But do put out there those quotes by Labour people. Ask him whether he agrees that intelligence rather than bombing is the best way to stop such attacks and ask him why he is putting forward as Home Secretary someone who has publicly expressed disdain for those services. Ask him whether he agrees with her words about "a defeat for the British state being a victory for us all". Etc etc.

There is plenty out there after all.

Barnesian said:

RobD said:

Barnesian said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

Zac Goldsmith's attack on Sadiq Khan linking him with terrorism is a cautionary tale. It cost Zac his 23,000 majority and his reputation.

Not sure it's quite on the same scale as Corbyn.

You're right. It isn't. But it illustrates the danger in that line of attack.

I hope Andrew Neil questions him closely on this. I suspect Corbyn will enhance his reputation. We'll see. The more he is seen as he is and not through hostile newspapers and commentators, the better he will do.

I wonder if that would hold true for videos of him praising the IRA's struggle?

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

He's an arselicker to Russian oligarchs now.

You should feel betrayed.

Nah, he's still a very young man, he's 45, Boris spent 7 years out of Parliament.

I suspect if you ever met him you'd like him.

Boris was Mayor of London - a position as prominent as most cabinet members.

Perhaps I would like him - I've read various conflicting accounts as to his personality.

matt said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

another_richard said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

George Osborne has been very busy, editing a paper and sticking up posters as well

https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/867094028801757185

well he's got so much time on his hands these days .....

You miss him don't you.

I predicted this.

Like I miss haemorroids

You'll feel better when you admit it.

Serious question.

Are you disappointed that Osborne didn't have the courage to challenge for the Conservative leadership ?

No, he took the view that someone who had been so deeply involved in the Remain campaign couldn't lead the party at that particular time.

He didn't want to see all the hard work of the past ten and a half years undone, like in 2005, when he declined to run, for the greater good.

June 23rd was the Cameroon Dunkerque.

Osborne is looking/waiting for the opportunity to launch Overlord.

I suspect his leadership ambitions ended with the UK's membership of the EU, but he might fancy moulding a future Tory leader down the line.

Remember within the next few years George Osborne is going to be an extremely wealthy man as well as influential man.

What chance you think it's Overlord but it turns out to be Jubilee?

I wouldn't trust him to run the Underground. Not even just one line.

Barnesian said:

RobD said:

Barnesian said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

Zac Goldsmith's attack on Sadiq Khan linking him with terrorism is a cautionary tale. It cost Zac his 23,000 majority and his reputation.

Not sure it's quite on the same scale as Corbyn.

You're right. It isn't. But it illustrates the danger in that line of attack.

I hope Andrew Neil questions him closely on this. I suspect Corbyn will enhance his reputation. We'll see. The more he is seen as he is and not through hostile newspapers and commentators, the better he will do.

That rather assumes for one that Corbyn is as he says he is and no more, and for two that people are in essence just being brainwashed into disliking him.

kle4 said:

Barnesian said:

RobD said:

Barnesian said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

Zac Goldsmith's attack on Sadiq Khan linking him with terrorism is a cautionary tale. It cost Zac his 23,000 majority and his reputation.

Not sure it's quite on the same scale as Corbyn.

You're right. It isn't. But it illustrates the danger in that line of attack.

I hope Andrew Neil questions him closely on this. I suspect Corbyn will enhance his reputation. We'll see. The more he is seen as he is and not through hostile newspapers and commentators, the better he will do.

That rather assumes for one that Corbyn is as he says he is and no more, and for two that people are in essence just being brainwashed into disliking him.

You're clearly not aware of the mainstream media.

SeanT said:

numbertwelve said:

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

That is a risk they may not want to take, true, although I think given that Corbyn has been forced to 'clarify' his views on such things twice already it's quite possible it will come up of its own accord.

However that could conceivably be bad news for Corbyn, for it then begs the question of whether they might go for a different line of attack - his record in this highly unsavoury case, which to put it mildly is underwhelming and is back in the news in the last fortnight:

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington-kids-homes-scandal-shame-of-ex-mayor-sandy-marks-pro-paedophile-past-1-5012565

I think any party would be foolish to campaign on terrorism now. It risks looking ghoulish.

The media might do it for them, mind.

Same thought occurred to me today. Manchester, paradoxically, makes it HARDER for the Tories to go at Corbyn over terrorism. It's so saddening and horrible, any electoral reference to terror, however oblique or tangential, could backfire badly.

Presumably - as you say - the media will feel less restraint. As they jolly well should. Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell are outright appeasers of terror, if not actual traitors.

What makes you think that they are not traitors? Really not sure I see it myself.

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

If Manchester had not happened then these posters would have been a humorous talking point in respect of a PM very much on the ropes and trying to change things as she went along whilst pretending otherwise. I think yesterday was arguably a leader's worst day in a GE since Brown met Mrs Duffy.

It would have got people talking about his paper in a big way. Is that not his job? Of course after events overnight it looks crass. But who could have foreseen that?

It was published AFTER the attacks (I think).

I am very sure that the posters will have been ordered before. He has been caught out by events. It happens. Ideally he would have cancelled but presumably it was too difficult.

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Aw, all the headbangers are upset because George Osborne is having fun at the Prime Minister's expense. He's grasped his new job's responsibilities early, which is to engage readers. Deference and obsequiousness would be hindrances, not assets.

I'm a professional journalist, you're not. That story just screams "non story which furthers my editorial agenda", the kind of thing the Express or the Sun or the Mirror might, if they are really at a pinch, run on a very very slow news day, and hope that no one really notices, even if it has the desired subliminal impact.

On the day after the worst atrocity on British soil in a decade? When the Prime Minister, the PM he is so blatantly yet adolescently mocking, is asking her advisors how many kids died?

It's just shit journalism. Shit editing. Just a bit shit. Call me a pious hypocritical twat, but Osborne is certainly burning his bridges - Tories won't forget this.

You're a pious hypocritical twat. The story isn't there for you but for the many thousands of young leftish Londoners who have enjoyed the discomfort the Prime Minister has suffered over the last few days. Yesterday's major news story is not so old (except in the minds of the most dementedly partisan Tories) that it isn't worth a reprise.

Not today, though. Not today. Manchester is massive. It's the most read and watched thing everywhere. The nation mourns. People cry. And Osborne titters maliciously, with his scented kerchief poised at a powdered nostril.

That's not the best look.

Indeed, May looks statesmanlike, even Corbyn acts seriously, Osborne acts like a sixth former it is not a good look. He is a very talented and intelligent man no doubt but he was never a leader

DavidL said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

If Manchester had not happened then these posters would have been a humorous talking point in respect of a PM very much on the ropes and trying to change things as she went along whilst pretending otherwise. I think yesterday was arguably a leader's worst day in a GE since Brown met Mrs Duffy.

It would have got people talking about his paper in a big way. Is that not his job? Of course after events overnight it looks crass. But who could have foreseen that?

It was published AFTER the attacks (I think).

I am very sure that the posters will have been ordered before. He has been caught out by events. It happens. Ideally he would have cancelled but presumably it was too difficult.

I think SeanT means the story?

SeanT said:

Can I please crave some understanding from PB-ers

I've been banned from Twitter by my girlfriend. She's a fierce 21 year old Corbynista, and she hates my right wing views, even as we have lots of fun. She's told me she can't continue to go out with me, if I publicly air my vile, Thatcherite opinions, and, like the French at Dien Bien Phu, I have folded pathetically, and agreed. Because she is absurdly beautiful and sexy, and I am a sad pussywhipped middle aged man in a swoon. Oh god. And she will probably dump me in a week, anyway.

So I am afraid I might be overly vocal on here, for a while, until I find somewhere else to go. Or she chucks me.

Phew. Sorry. Had to share that. Apols.

I don't think it'll be a week.

But I'm guessing it won't be beyond June 9th...

RobD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RobD said:

OldKingCole said:

Baskerville said:

FPT
Jason said:
» show previous quotes
One thing I found curious about this announcement was the total lack of scrutiny from either the Tories or the media. As you say, one of the most naked electoral bribes I can ever remember, coming in at an eye watering 10 billion quid a year. As I mentioned earlier, the scrutiny of Labour's manifesto (and Mr Corbyn) has been woefully lacking because nobody took it seriously. That cannot be allowed to continue.

We all know the voting history of 18-24 year olds, so the Tories needn't worry too much, I feel. They didn't even turn out for the EU referendum in any great number, and I expect the same at this election.

They don't want to give an obvious bribe the oxygen of publicity... instead concentrate on the overall sums not adding up. Don't want to increase awareness among benefiting students, do we?

Did they actually not turnoput. I seem to recall reading that the figures showe dreasonab;e levels.
Not as high as my age group, admittedly.

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2015

There appears to be no significant increase in turnout among young people, with 18-24s almost half as likely to vote as those aged 65+ (43% vs 78%; in 2010 estimated turnout for 18-24s was 44%).

Which half of that age group do you think is voting?

The half who made it to university or the half that did not?

I've never understood the meme that students do not vote. In 2001 I was living in a Halls of Residence as an 18 year old student and virtually everyone I spoke to that day voted. While young people as a whole do not turnout I imagine most who dropped out of education before uni are those not voting.

Would be interested to see some actual numbers on that, but I fear no analysis has been done.

Indeed but extrapolating from other things we know, the more educated tend to vote more than the less educated overall I believe. It seems logical to imagine there is a sharp divide between those who have and have not gone on to university at 18. In my anecdotal experience the people I know who haven't gone to university are precisely the sort not to vote.

I would imagine (just an educated guess) that the turnout for 18-21 students is not that much if any lower than turnout for older age groups 25+ ... while turnout for 18-21 non-students will be dramatically lower, lower than the average figures we normally see and potentially as low as single figures or teens.

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:

numbertwelve said:

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

That is a risk they may not want to take, true, although I think given that Corbyn has been forced to 'clarify' his views on such things twice already it's quite possible it will come up of its own accord.

However that could conceivably be bad news for Corbyn, for it then begs the question of whether they might go for a different line of attack - his record in this highly unsavoury case, which to put it mildly is underwhelming and is back in the news in the last fortnight:

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington-kids-homes-scandal-shame-of-ex-mayor-sandy-marks-pro-paedophile-past-1-5012565

I think any party would be foolish to campaign on terrorism now. It risks looking ghoulish.

The media might do it for them, mind.

Same thought occurred to me today. Manchester, paradoxically, makes it HARDER for the Tories to go at Corbyn over terrorism. It's so saddening and horrible, any electoral reference to terror, however oblique or tangential, could backfire badly.

Presumably - as you say - the media will feel less restraint. As they jolly well should. Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell are outright appeasers of terror, if not actual traitors.

What makes you think that they are not traitors? Really not sure I see it myself.

I think Abbott's and McDonnell's comments on the IRA (inter alia) mark them down as traitors. For sure. If we're being honest. I'm not convinced Corbyn himself has said anything quite as damning. Though he is definitely a fellow-traveller, and an appeaser.

Abbott's traitorous views are on the record.

SeanT said:

Can I please crave some understanding from PB-ers

I've been banned from Twitter by my girlfriend. She's a fierce 21 year old Corbynista, and she hates my right wing views, even as we have lots of fun. She's told me she can't continue to go out with me, if I publicly air my vile, Thatcherite opinions, and, like the French at Dien Bien Phu, I have folded pathetically, and agreed. Because she is absurdly beautiful and sexy, and I am a sad pussywhipped middle aged man in a swoon. Oh god. And she will probably dump me in a week, anyway.

So I am afraid I might be overly vocal on here, for a while, until I find somewhere else to go. Or she chucks me.

Phew. Sorry. Had to share that. Apols.

Just dump her - and find yourself a nice 20 year-old Tory as consolation!!

It is in extreme bad taste to keep writing about the IRA on the day when so many innocent people have died. If you want to attack the Labour Leadership then do it on another day or not at all.
The IRA pitch smacks of desperation.

Cyclefree said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

Don't attack over the IRA. But do put out there those quotes by Labour people. Ask him whether he agrees that intelligence rather than bombing is the best way to stop such attacks and ask him why he is putting forward as Home Secretary someone who has publicly expressed disdain for those services. Ask him whether he agrees with her words about "a defeat for the British state being a victory for us all". Etc etc.

There is plenty out there after all.

Andrew Niel should do this not the tories.

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:

numbertwelve said:

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

That is a risk they may not want to take, true, although I think given that Corbyn has been forced to 'clarify' his views on such things twice already it's quite possible it will come up of its own accord.

However that could conceivably be bad news for Corbyn, for it then begs the question of whether they might go for a different line of attack - his record in this highly unsavoury case, which to put it mildly is underwhelming and is back in the news in the last fortnight:

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington-kids-homes-scandal-shame-of-ex-mayor-sandy-marks-pro-paedophile-past-1-5012565

I think any party would be foolish to campaign on terrorism now. It risks looking ghoulish.

The media might do it for them, mind.

Same thought occurred to me today. Manchester, paradoxically, makes it HARDER for the Tories to go at Corbyn over terrorism. It's so saddening and horrible, any electoral reference to terror, however oblique or tangential, could backfire badly.

Presumably - as you say - the media will feel less restraint. As they jolly well should. Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell are outright appeasers of terror, if not actual traitors.

What makes you think that they are not traitors? Really not sure I see it myself.

I think Abbott's and McDonnell's comments on the IRA (inter alia) mark them down as traitors. For sure. If we're being honest. I'm not convinced Corbyn himself has said anything quite as damning. Though he is definitely a fellow-traveller, and an appeaser.

Did he not invite IRA terrorists to the HoC about a week after Brighton? It says everything that you want to say about the Labour party that he was ever allowed to stand for them again.

murali_s said:

TudorRose said:

SeanT said:

Can I please crave some understanding from PB-ers

I've been banned from Twitter by my girlfriend. She's a fierce 21 year old Corbynista, and she hates my right wing views, even as we have lots of fun. She's told me she can't continue to go out with me, if I publicly air my vile, Thatcherite opinions, and, like the French at Dien Bien Phu, I have folded pathetically, and agreed. Because she is absurdly beautiful and sexy, and I am a sad pussywhipped middle aged man in a swoon. Oh god. And she will probably dump me in a week, anyway.

So I am afraid I might be overly vocal on here, for a while, until I find somewhere else to go. Or she chucks me.

Phew. Sorry. Had to share that. Apols.

Just dump her - and find yourself a nice 20 year-old Tory as consolation!!

20 year old Tories - do they exist?

I'm afraid they do, they get lots of votes from that age, just nowhere near as many as Labour. As they are fewer, finding ones of equivalent beauty with a penchant for thriller writers may be tougher though.

roserees64 said:

It is in extreme bad taste to keep writing about the IRA on the day when so many innocent people have died. If you want to attack the Labour Leadership then do it on another day or not at all.
The IRA pitch smacks of desperation.

Here in Canada the news media including the US have been constantly comparing the attack to the IRA outrages

kle4 said:

roserees64 said:

It is in extreme bad taste to keep writing about the IRA on the day when so many innocent people have died. If you want to attack the Labour Leadership then do it on another day or not at all.
The IRA pitch smacks of desperation.

People are free to attack the Labour or Tory leaderships on this or any other day, yes even such a day as this. It's a political website, if people cannot face discussing politics on such a day, when there is likely to be much in bad taste as emotions get heated, then they should wait until a day they can face it.

And that is fine, by the way. I cannot fine many a political bitchfight.

DavidL said:

SeanT said:

DavidL said:

SeanT said:

numbertwelve said:

ydoethur said:

MikeL said:

Cyclefree said:

I share what @TudorRose wrote on the previous thread about how to tackle Corbyn.

Perhaps some comments from Labour types might help.........................

But surely Conservatives are going to have to be very, very careful here - because if they now attack Corbyn over IRA etc it may well appear highly inappropriate after what has happened - they may well be accused of exploiting the situation. Which could be a huge negative for them.

So it may well now be much harder for Con to finish the campaign with attacks on Corbyn along these lines.

Having said that, what has happened has obviously massively elevated the issue of security which has to be a strong point for Con.

That is a risk they may not want to take, true, although I think given that Corbyn has been forced to 'clarify' his views on such things twice already it's quite possible it will come up of its own accord.

However that could conceivably be bad news for Corbyn, for it then begs the question of whether they might go for a different line of attack - his record in this highly unsavoury case, which to put it mildly is underwhelming and is back in the news in the last fortnight:

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington-kids-homes-scandal-shame-of-ex-mayor-sandy-marks-pro-paedophile-past-1-5012565

I think any party would be foolish to campaign on terrorism now. It risks looking ghoulish.

The media might do it for them, mind.

Same thought occurred to me today. Manchester, paradoxically, makes it HARDER for the Tories to go at Corbyn over terrorism. It's so saddening and horrible, any electoral reference to terror, however oblique or tangential, could backfire badly.

Presumably - as you say - the media will feel less restraint. As they jolly well should. Corbyn, Abbott and McDonnell are outright appeasers of terror, if not actual traitors.

What makes you think that they are not traitors? Really not sure I see it myself.

I think Abbott's and McDonnell's comments on the IRA (inter alia) mark them down as traitors. For sure. If we're being honest. I'm not convinced Corbyn himself has said anything quite as damning. Though he is definitely a fellow-traveller, and an appeaser.

Did he not invite IRA terrorists to the HoC about a week after Brighton? It says everything that you want to say about the Labour party that he was ever allowed to stand for them again.

Hopefully the three of them didn't say anything after the 96 attack.