politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Mrs May’s extraordinary ratings honeymoon ended with the manif
Comments
-
Worth noting that even at 43 the Tories are poling more in GE run in than any time since Maggie and in some polls above that. It's hardly failure. It's Corbyn that's surging, not May that's sinking in general terms.0
-
But I'm not the one who wishes appeasers and terrorist sympathisers to become our PM, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Home Secretary. They are the frothers, not me.Barnesian said:
Jason. You're frothing.Jason said:
I understand why you have morphed into a Corbynista right before our very eyes. Your leader, the absurd Fishfinger (great name for a future Bond movie), is even worse than Corbyn.MarkSenior said:
I expect that objective observers will see another competent performance by Corbyn tonight v Andrew Neil but we will see .Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.0 -
It is just to boost the "anti-leak" meme back in the States. After all, there is a new leak about the Trump mafia everyday.Sandpit said:Bloody hell, Rex Tillerson put on a plane to London to apologise to Boris in person for intelligence leaks to US media.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/us-secretary-state-rex-tillerson-makes-snap-visit-uk-amid-anger/0 -
Then how come terrorism against us by essentially the same groups of people were going on *before* 9/11 and that adventurism?Roger said:
But what he said is essentially correct whatever you might think of the inappropriateness of the timing.Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
If you need evidence that the majority of the British electorate agree that our adventurism in the Middle East is in large part responsible for stirring up the hornets nest look at the success of Charlie Kennedy whose only memorable action was condemning Iraq.0 -
Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
0 -
i just had an email from a friend in Didsbury which is home to the mosque used by the Manchester bomber.
Despite being as liberal as most people from Didsbury she posed the question 'if the Alt Right had taken over a church (which is what the mosque has done) and turned it into their headquarters and one of their members had murdered 22 people in the name of their ideology the place would be closed down'
Clearly wrong headed but the point that we are accomodating of religions however crackpot whereas we wouldn't anything else is well made0 -
Huh, TIL that the US Apprentice spawned the UK one and not the other way around. Thanks.Jonathan said:
It's Donald Trump.Sandpit said:What Corbyn should have said today?
https://twitter.com/twlldun/status/868044683792003078
No Trump, No US Apprentice TV Series.
No US Apprentice, No UK Apprentice.
No UK Apprentice, No Katie Hopkins.
Whoever first commissioned the US Apprentice has a lot to answer for.0 -
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far? You know the problem with that wall is we're not banging our head against it hard enough.blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
The crumb of comfort I have at the moment is that back 2 years ago, PB was sure it was EMICIPM...
Look how that turned out.0 -
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.0 -
But May isn't sinking because of Corbyn...if that makes sense.dyedwoolie said:Worth noting that even at 43 the Tories are poling more in GE run in than any time since Maggie and in some polls above that. It's hardly failure. It's Corbyn that's surging, not May that's sinking in general terms.
0 -
You can count on it 100% - his base is pure Merkel 2015 on this, and so is he. Labour voters need to have a really hard think about the consequences of a Corbyn win.blueblue said:
The company he keeps,i really can see him doing a merkel in all refugees/migrants welcome.Tykejohnno said:
Open doors. Enjoy life under Corbynblueblue said:Tykejohnno said:Surbition posted -
The North is back with Labour.
What is labour's immigration policy ? Serious question for us northern folk who voted brexit to control immigration.
We will have a Merkel policy who is about to win MASSIVELY.0 -
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the table, The EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be done and the EU won't be more accommodating later on. At some point, someone will have to bite the bullet, say, give them what they want (with a haggle of course), and get on with our lives. The approximate shape of the deal is clear; better than nothing but worse than what we had before. Something for everybody, in a way.SeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.0 -
Not just leading, incapable of thinking. Corbyn could not refer to his notes or his autocue every time a problem arose, and it would the second he became PM. He would have to think and act in real time, beyond his comfort zone of apologists and mad fan base.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
I really do wonder what his supporters here and elsewhere expect of him if the ultimate catastrophe played out and he became PM. Who would pull his stings? McDonnell? Milne? The SWP? Stop the War? Who else would he lobbied by? ISIS?
It's not just concerning, worrying - it's absolutely terrifying that he could possibly be our next PM. And it should terrify every single right thinking person in this country.
0 -
These people can be what you say they will be ONLY IF the British people vote them in.Jason said:
There may well be a smell of brown trousers, yes. And it's easy to understand why. JEREMY CORBYN could be our PM, JOHN MCDONNELL could be our Chancellor, and DIANE ABBOTT could be our Home Secretary.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza will argue his corner well.Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
The smell of brown trousers from the Tories is very telling. Is this all that you've got?
Of course I'm fucking worried!!!0 -
Utterly counterproductive. You can make the case that Corbyn is not the right person to counter the extremist threat (and I think you'd be right), but it's not at all credible (particularly with swing voters) to imply he's in some way on the side of the Manchester bomber.blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
Remember, this sort of approach was tried in London by Goldsmith against Khan, and certainly backfired.
I actually think Corbyn's team has been quite canny here. There is a category of "stop the world, I want to get off" ex-UKIP who rather like the "stay out of foreign wars" line. An odd overlap in the Venn diagram where Corbynistas, liberal pacifists, and some Faragistas come together.
Responses are available to May - but they need to be serious, not pantomiming.0 -
Is it Christianity? "Former altar boy". Just saying, like.SeanT said:
And there is only one religion which is a clear and present danger to our wellbeing and safety.Roger said:i just had an email from a friend in Didsbury which is home to the mosque used by the Manchester bomber.
Despite being as liberal as most people from Didsbury she posed the question 'if the Alt Right had taken over a church and turned it into their headquarters and one of their members had murdered 22 people the place would be closed down'
Clearly wrong headed but the point that we are accomodating of religions however crackpot whereas we wouldn't anything else is well made
Go on Roger. Say it. Say the name. Be brave.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-400593510 -
So why are you so rattled ? Do you think Corbyn & co. will actually win ?Jason said:
Not just leading, incapable of thinking. Corbyn could not refer to his notes or his autocue every time a problem arose, and it would the second he became PM. He would have to think and act in real time, beyond his comfort zone of apologists and mad fan base.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
I really do wonder what his supporters here and elsewhere expect of him if the ultimate catastrophe played out and he became PM. Who would pull his stings? McDonnell? Milne? The SWP? Stop the War? Who else would be lobbied by?
It's not just concerning, worrying - it's absolutely terrifying that he could possibly be our next PM. And it should terrify every single right thinking person in this country.0 -
Agreed. But who is the alternative?Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.0 -
Guess he was around anyway for the NATO summit yesterday, but impressive that he came to personally deal with the story.surbiton said:
It is just to boost the "anti-leak" meme back in the States. After all, there is a new leak about the Trump mafia everyday.Sandpit said:Bloody hell, Rex Tillerson put on a plane to London to apologise to Boris in person for intelligence leaks to US media.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/us-secretary-state-rex-tillerson-makes-snap-visit-uk-amid-anger/
A very different reaction to the scandals they're embroiled in back at home, and a good diplomatic move by Tillerson.0 -
-
I'm not convinced that "religions" in the plural, there, is correct.Roger said:i just had an email from a friend in Didsbury which is home to the mosque used by the Manchester bomber.
Despite being as liberal as most people from Didsbury she posed the question 'if the Alt Right had taken over a church (which is what the mosque has done) and turned it into their headquarters and one of their members had murdered 22 people in the name of their ideology the place would be closed down'
Clearly wrong headed but the point that we are accomodating of religions however crackpot whereas we wouldn't anything else is well made0 -
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
The manifesto is fine - and the rest of your post is partisan projection. Corbyn, Mcdonnel and Abbott are fairly smart people - certainly more individually intelligent than Donald J. for example.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
If they were to get into power, their radicalism would be moderated by the constraints built into the system.
They're more likely to be *a bit disappointing* than *scary*0 -
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.FF43 said:
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the tableSeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.
0 -
For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
The Tories should make something of that. Mrs May has a quiet word with Donald and Air Force Three is scrambled...Sandpit said:Bloody hell, Rex Tillerson put on a plane to London to apologise to Boris in person for intelligence leaks to US media.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/us-secretary-state-rex-tillerson-makes-snap-visit-uk-amid-anger/0 -
Not the most optimistic chap are you? Extrapolating a trend from the worst poll going. Do you really forsee Labour on 43 points under Corbyn? nearly half of all voters (and presumably a good third of all pensioners) rolling the dice for Jeremy?SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.0 -
It's a bit early to be saying "regularly". There have been only three polls that put Tory support in the "low 40s", which I define as 40-43. The average Tory share in polls with fieldwork from the 18th onwards has been 44.2%. Taken at face value the polls suggest Tory support is still in the mid-40s. Down a touch from their pre-manifesto highs, but is there anything coming that will send it lower?SirNorfolkPassmore said:Really? Tories were regularly in the high 40s at one point in the campaign, and are regularly low 40s now.
Her stick-it-to-the-EU Brexit coalition seems to be still holding. Corbyn has done very well to rally support from supporters of the minor parties, but can he break apart the Brexit coalition?0 -
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.0 -
Sean, As the self declared doyen of the active pb pols, I remain serene. Mrs May will be returned with a 100 seat majority, perhaps more. All will be well.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.0 -
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
Sensible stuf IMO.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
0 -
It doesn't seem to be now.Peter_the_Punter said:
And of course the book Guilty Men, published in 1940 by Foot et al, absolutely trashed the pre-war conservative administrations and destroyed many reputations, notably Baldwin's.WhisperingOracle said:
or even collaboration !WhisperingOracle said:
Seems highly unlikely. Corbyn's spiritual forefathers, such as Michael Foot, were actually preparing for a kind of communist "British partisans" domestic resistance against the Nazis, while elements in Mi5 at the time (1939-40 ), linked to the Halifax faction, were actually preparing for coilaboration.Alice_Aforethought said:
Corbyn in 1940 would not through choice have been at war with Nazi Germany at all. They were allied with the USSR so that made them the good guys. A Spitfire pilot would have been Corbyn's class enemy.Sunil_Prasannan said:
You Lefties only wanted a "Second Front" after Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.MarkSenior said:
It was the Conservatives ( Churchill excepted ) who liked to have tea with Herr Hitler and exchange bits of paper with him .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Corbyn in 1940.Jason said:
Corbyn's approach to terrorism - 'a kind of elaborate hand wringing'. Said by a Guardian columnist.rottenborough said:Corbyn has gone down well with the Mail headline writers:
"Making excuses for terrorism: Corbyn faces furious backlash over 'inappropriate and crass' bid to exploit Manchester bombing by blaming British Middle East military adventures"
"Chaps, clearly the War against Nazism isn't working. We've had to evacuate Dunkirk, and France is on the verge of collapse. Let's have a nice chat over tea with Herr Hitler!"
He would have been cheering on the Luftwaffe.
Appeasement became a dirty word after that, if it wasn't beforehand.0 -
I don't get Kezia Dugdale. In the last year she has given two of the best speeches I have heard in the Scottish parliament - absolute barn stormers but on the other hand then here she is punching an ice sculpture of a pound.Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/8680862441227345920 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
0 -
Priti Patelmidwinter said:
Agreed. But who is the alternative?Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
0 -
This, too:blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/8680021577059983360 -
She then moves to delivery phase. Beating Corbyn is the easy bit. There is little to no evidence to suggest that Mrs May has it in her to lead the UK to a successful Brexit.JohnO said:
Sean, As the self declared doyen of the active pb pols, I remain serene. Mrs May will be returned with a 100 seat majority, perhaps more. All will be well.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
0 -
Mr. blue, indeed. The Conservative campaign is a masterclass in buggering up a fantastic position.0
-
Do you mean that Corbyn is lying and doesn't really believe it?ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
Or that you don't agree with the bit 'before the but'?0 -
Mrs May has a quiet word with Donald and Air Force Three is scrambled....so that she can escape from Britain after a humiliating defeat !Carolus_Rex said:
The Tories should make something of that. Mrs May has a quiet word with Donald and Air Force Three is scrambled...Sandpit said:Bloody hell, Rex Tillerson put on a plane to London to apologise to Boris in person for intelligence leaks to US media.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/26/us-secretary-state-rex-tillerson-makes-snap-visit-uk-amid-anger/0 -
-
Or, to summarise:rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
“The blame is with the terrorists, but…”0 -
The challenge for the Tories is how to deal with the question about how their policy actually differs given that they won't say which groups of immigrants they will cut or when the notional 100k target will be met. Both policies look a bit like open borders and unlimited numbers, with the only difference being the "aspiration" that nobody (possibly including the cabinet) believes.blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
0 -
Nice spot Didsbury. My granny used to live there.Roger said:i just had an email from a friend in Didsbury which is home to the mosque used by the Manchester bomber.
Despite being as liberal as most people from Didsbury she posed the question 'if the Alt Right had taken over a church (which is what the mosque has done) and turned it into their headquarters and one of their members had murdered 22 people in the name of their ideology the place would be closed down'
Clearly wrong headed but the point that we are accomodating of religions however crackpot whereas we wouldn't anything else is well made
The mosque chucked the bomber out, when he objected to anti-extremist preaching. The mosque then reported him to prevent.
Far from being an extremist takeover, Didsbury mosque seems admirably run.0 -
I'm saying it's a possibility, yes, obviously, in a two horse race. I can read the opnion polls the same as the next person. I can see the Tories have run an appalling campaign, if you could even describe it as that. May has been uninspiring, dour, stark, brutalist, and yes, even Brown-esque. I saw what happened in Brexit, then Trump.surbiton said:
So why are you so rattled ? Do you think Corbyn & co. will actually win ?Jason said:
Not just leading, incapable of thinking. Corbyn could not refer to his notes or his autocue every time a problem arose, and it would the second he became PM. He would have to think and act in real time, beyond his comfort zone of apologists and mad fan base.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
I really do wonder what his supporters here and elsewhere expect of him if the ultimate catastrophe played out and he became PM. Who would pull his stings? McDonnell? Milne? The SWP? Stop the War? Who else would be lobbied by?
It's not just concerning, worrying - it's absolutely terrifying that he could possibly be our next PM. And it should terrify every single right thinking person in this country.
The Labour manifesto has been superficially well received, partly because it has received almost no serious scrutiny whatsoever, because nobody took it seriously. I can even see that Corbyn has gone above the very low expectations that were set of him. (I do think he made a grave error this morning with that speech, though).
So yes, I have been rattled, and so has every other Tory supporter in the country (and they're lying if they deny it).
I have a right to be rattled considering an obscure, mad, 70 year old far left, terrorist sympathsing, anti British zealot could be, in the right circumstances, our next PM, representing the UK on the world stage. Shaking hands with IS, and openly declaring a dislike of the USA, our biggest ally. Of course I'm worried.
I'm pretty sure all of you lefties would be equally terrified if Nigel Farage had an outside chance of becoming PM.0 -
Except, it's not going to work that way. As I said, the EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be done and the EU won't be more accommodating later on. Also it won't be a single all or nothing deal hammered out in the early hours of a 2019 Spring morning. It will be a series of negotiations lasting a decade or more.ThreeQuidder said:
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.FF43 said:
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the tableSeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.0 -
We will have a Merkel policy who is about to win MASSIVELY.surbiton said:
You can count on it 100% - his base is pure Merkel 2015 on this, and so is he. Labour voters need to have a really hard think about the consequences of a Corbyn win.blueblue said:
The company he keeps,i really can see him doing a merkel in all refugees/migrants welcome.Tykejohnno said:
Open doors. Enjoy life under Corbynblueblue said:Tykejohnno said:Surbition posted -
The North is back with Labour.
What is labour's immigration policy ? Serious question for us northern folk who voted brexit to control immigration.
The voice of corbyn's labour speaks - rub your noses in it.0 -
I'm interested as to whether those who really dislike Corbyn disagree with these sentiments, or actually agree/don't mind them so much - but think Corbyn is lying about his views.foxinsoxuk said:
Sensible stuf IMO.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
Very, very good speech by Corbyn. That's quite possibly the best thing I have seen him say, ever. Hmm.foxinsoxuk said:
Sensible stuf IMO.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
Hugely misleading. Wakefield Constituency UKIP has endorsed Antony Calvert.Scott_P said:0 -
I mean that he doesn't really believe the bit before the but, he's just saying it because he feels he has to.rkrkrk said:
Do you mean that Corbyn is lying and doesn't really believe it?ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
Or that you don't agree with the bit 'before the but'?0 -
We discussed the Tory campaign strategy yesterday Richard.Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
0 -
WTF is Hugo Rifkind ? Is he related to Malcolm Rifkind.ThreeQuidder said:
This, too:blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/8680021577059983360 -
Nope, we can leave without a deal.FF43 said:
Except, it's not going to work that way. As I said, the EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be doneThreeQuidder said:
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.FF43 said:
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the tableSeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.0 -
I reckon that's the trap. The Labour machine is luring the Tories to go heavily negative in the final fortnight. Shades of Remain's Project Fear.blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
Yes.ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.
0 -
I saw bits of it on News 24. He was good.bobajobPB said:
Very, very good speech by Corbyn. That's quite possibly the best thing I have seen him say, ever. Hmm.foxinsoxuk said:
Sensible stuf IMO.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
People who switch because of X switch when X not two weeks later.SeanT said:
Talk me through that.ThreeQuidder said:
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.0 -
You are a bit unkind to our Richard. The Tory manifesto was not written by a committee, it was written by someone called tim.bobajobPB said:
We discussed the Tory campaign strategy yesterday Richard.Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
0 -
We haven't had a thread lately on how Lynton Crosby is an unmatched political genius who has a vice-like grip on the narrative, not just of the campaign, but of British politics for the next decade or three.
Could we have one for the weekend, please? Ta.0 -
Possibly the most bizarre story of the campaign so far, if not of all campaigns in recent memory. A spoof??Scott_P said:0 -
Corbyns terror speech headlines BBC website.but only 9th most read.0
-
So good that he wouldn't take questions on it?surbiton said:
I saw bits of it on News 24. He was good.bobajobPB said:
Very, very good speech by Corbyn. That's quite possibly the best thing I have seen him say, ever. Hmm.foxinsoxuk said:
Sensible stuf IMO.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/8680716390612787200 -
Do you actually run a business, employ people or hire talent from overseas? Does your business export and import from the EU? Of course a deal is needed, and a good one at that.ThreeQuidder said:
Nope, we can leave without a deal.FF43 said:
Except, it's not going to work that way. As I said, the EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be doneThreeQuidder said:
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.FF43 said:
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the tableSeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.0 -
A boring upper middle class pundit .surbiton said:
WTF is Hugo Rifkind ? Is he related to Malcolm Rifkind.ThreeQuidder said:
This, too:blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/8680021577059983360 -
Absurd.Pong said:
The manifesto is fine - and the rest of your post is partisan projection. Corbyn, Mcdonnel and Abbott are fairly smart people - certainly more individually intelligent than Donald J. for example.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
If they were to get into power, their radicalism would be moderated by the constraints built into the system.
They're more likely to be *a bit disappointing* than *scary*0 -
Thsnks for the response.ThreeQuidder said:
I mean that he doesn't really believe the bit before the but, he's just saying it because he feels he has to.rkrkrk said:
Do you mean that Corbyn is lying and doesn't really believe it?ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
Or that you don't agree with the bit 'before the but'?
So the substance of the speech isn't actually that bad in your eyes?
It's just you don't believe he means it.
So if TM or someone you thought credible gave the speech you wouldn't be appalled by it?0 -
Sir Norfolk, to be fair, it seems to be Nick Timothy (think I got the name right) who decided to completely **** up the manifesto, not Crosby.
Mr. Bobajob, I saw much of the speech. It was persuasively argued. But he's still a self-declared friend of Hamas and Hezbollah, and absolutely unacceptable as PM. *sighs*
Damn the PLP for their stupidity, damn Ed Miliband for the £3 members, and damn May for managing to throw away the lion's share of a seemingly unassailable lead.0 -
Extrapolating would have given the independence campaign a win; extrapolating would have taken Melenchon into the French run off. Sometimes, poll surges do peak, or reverse.SeanT said:
Talk me through that. Extrapolating the trend of the Brexit polls from several weeks before the vote would have given you the correct outcome. A LEAVE win.ThreeQuidder said:
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.
It's almost the same for Indyref. They started way behind, then there was turning point (like the Tory manifesto) - the 2nd TV debate. I'm still not sure why that turned the campaign, but it did. From then the huge NO leads gradually declined. In this case extrapolation would have showed you it was gonna be a lot narrower than almost anyone expected. And so it was.0 -
Do you realise the next three days will be Britain basking in the hot Bank Holiday sun ? Nobody is going to give a dam about his speech and this evening's interview. The choice of a Friday evening before the Bank Holiday was brilliant !Jason said:
I'm saying it's a possibility, yes, obviously, in a two horse race. I can read the opnion polls the same as the next person. I can see the Tories have run an appalling campaign, if you could even describe it as that. May has been uninspiring, dour, stark, brutalist, and yes, even Brown-esque. I saw what happened in Brexit, then Trump.surbiton said:
So why are you so rattled ? Do you think Corbyn & co. will actually win ?Jason said:
Not just leading, incapable of thinking. Corbyn could not refer to his notes or his autocue every time a problem arose, and it would the second he became PM. He would have to think and act in real time, beyond his comfort zone of apologists and mad fan base.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
I really do wonder what his supporters here and elsewhere expect of him if the ultimate catastrophe played out and he became PM. Who would pull his stings? McDonnell? Milne? The SWP? Stop the War? Who else would be lobbied by?
It's not just concerning, worrying - it's absolutely terrifying that he could possibly be our next PM. And it should terrify every single right thinking person in this country.
The Labour manifesto has been superficially well received, partly because it has received almost no serious scrutiny whatsoever, because nobody took it seriously. I can even see that Corbyn has gone above the very low expectations that were set of him. (I do think he made a grave error this morning with that speech, though).
So yes, I have been rattled, and so has every other Tory supporter in the country (and they're lying if they deny it).
I have a right to be rattled considering an obscure, mad, 70 year old far left, terrorist sympathsing, anti British zealot could be, in the right circumstances, our next PM, representing the UK on the world stage. Shaking hands with IS, and openly declaring a dislike of the USA, our biggest ally. Of course I'm worried.
I'm pretty sure all of you lefties would be equally terrified if Nigel Farage had an outside chance of becoming PM.0 -
Indeed - at all times the causing ourselves the most economic and financial damage over the longest possible period remains an option.ThreeQuidder said:
Nope, we can leave without a deal.FF43 said:
Except, it's not going to work that way. As I said, the EU will still be there, a deal will still need to be doneThreeQuidder said:
Nope. She's been very clear that she's content to Leave with no deal.FF43 said:
It's going to drag on. Even if Mrs May walked away, she or her successor will have to come back to the tableSeanT said:
I don't think anyone has a scooby how it will play out. There are zillions of possibilities.
Right now there is a very strong possibility it will be Impasse Brexit. From what I've read it sounds like the EU will demand €100bn on June 12th; the PM will be forced to say No.
Stalemate.
Which is as it should be if she wants to get a good deal, of course.
0 -
Explains a lot. tim finally gets his own back on the PB Tories.surbiton said:
You are a bit unkind to our Richard. The Tory manifesto was not written by a committee, it was written by someone called tim.bobajobPB said:
We discussed the Tory campaign strategy yesterday Richard.Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
La vengeance est un plat qui se mange froide, as they say in Merseyside.0 -
Just shows again how far UKIP has regressed back from being a genuine political party with a brand identity and common message, into being a collection of local oddballs writing green ink letters to the local rag.bobajobPB said:
Possibly the most bizarre story of the campaign so far, if not of all campaigns in recent memory. A spoof??Scott_P said:
This bloke probably had a run in with the Tory candidate at a Rotary Club luncheon in 1989, and sees now as the perfect moment for revenge.
0 -
Negative campaigning on things people _actually_ hate does work, whether it's the dementia tax or open borders. The Tories' VI is fine - it's Labour's that needs to be forced back down. And if we still lose, at least we'll have gone down fighting.bobajobPB said:
I reckon that's the trap. The Labour machine is luring the Tories to go heavily negative in the final fortnight. Shades of Remain's Project Fear.blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
LOL!Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
While May's speeches are full of intellectual argument.
Brexit means Brexit FFS.0 -
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.rkrkrk said:
Thsnks for the response.ThreeQuidder said:
I mean that he doesn't really believe the bit before the but, he's just saying it because he feels he has to.rkrkrk said:
Do you mean that Corbyn is lying and doesn't really believe it?ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
Or that you don't agree with the bit 'before the but'?
So the substance of the speech isn't actually that bad in your eyes?
It's just you don't believe he means it.
So if TM or someone you thought credible gave the speech you wouldn't be appalled by it?0 -
CleggasmSean_F said:
Extrapolating would have given the independence campaign a win; extrapolating would have taken Melenchon into the French run off. Sometimes, poll surges do peak, or reverse.SeanT said:
Talk me through that. Extrapolating the trend of the Brexit polls from several weeks before the vote would have given you the correct outcome. A LEAVE win.ThreeQuidder said:
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.
It's almost the same for Indyref. They started way behind, then there was turning point (like the Tory manifesto) - the 2nd TV debate. I'm still not sure why that turned the campaign, but it did. From then the huge NO leads gradually declined. In this case extrapolation would have showed you it was gonna be a lot narrower than almost anyone expected. And so it was.0 -
I don't think that we did ourselves any favours in terms of making friends and influencing people with such actions as, say, Sykes-Picot, the Suez War and the coup against Mosaddegh.JosiasJessop said:Then how come terrorism against us by essentially the same groups of people were going on *before* 9/11 and that adventurism?
We have a history of weakening relatively sane secularists when they act against our short-term economic interests. If we could just stop making things worse for a change then perhaps, over time, they would get better.0 -
That, too.Jonathan said:
CleggasmSean_F said:
Extrapolating would have given the independence campaign a win; extrapolating would have taken Melenchon into the French run off. Sometimes, poll surges do peak, or reverse.SeanT said:
Talk me through that. Extrapolating the trend of the Brexit polls from several weeks before the vote would have given you the correct outcome. A LEAVE win.ThreeQuidder said:
"Extrapolate the trend" is about the dumbest thing one can do with an opinion poll series.SeanT said:
Not if she can somehow conjure a three figure majority from this mess. All the gaffes and stupidities will be forgiven and forgotten.Ishmael_Z said:
We get that whatever happens. Irrespective of the size of May's majority she is damaged goods from now on.Razedabode said:Labour's manifesto is so barmy that'll end in a huge economic downturn. We all know who that affects the most.
There is literally nothing positive to say about Labour and its leader. For christs sake we're looking at Abbot as home Secretary and McDonnell as chancellor. We'll have an army and military hardware Corbyn would never touch. We'll have so called peace envoys that no-one will pay attention to. Unions will strike at will. Companies will begin to lay off workers due to ever increasing overheads and an increasingly inflexible labour market.
To top it off, we'll have a Prime Minister incapable of leading.
But, that looks increasingly unlikely.
Look at this graph of YouGov VI halfway down the article.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/
Extrapolate the trend of the gentle Tory decline and the firm Labour surge. Another ten days of this will see Labour on about 43 and Tories on about 39.
And Jeremy Corbyn will probably be in Downing Street, supported by Nicola Sturgeon.
Other than take the latest poll as gospel even if not backed up by other evidence.
It's almost the same for Indyref. They started way behind, then there was turning point (like the Tory manifesto) - the 2nd TV debate. I'm still not sure why that turned the campaign, but it did. From then the huge NO leads gradually declined. In this case extrapolation would have showed you it was gonna be a lot narrower than almost anyone expected. And so it was.0 -
I'm now of the view that he would be a better PM than May, who is demonstrably incapable of sound thought. They are both shite, but he is slightly less shite than May.Morris_Dancer said:Sir Norfolk, to be fair, it seems to be Nick Timothy (think I got the name right) who decided to completely **** up the manifesto, not Crosby.
Mr. Bobajob, I saw much of the speech. It was persuasively argued. But he's still a self-declared friend of Hamas and Hezbollah, and absolutely unacceptable as PM. *sighs*
Damn the PLP for their stupidity, damn Ed Miliband for the £3 members, and damn May for managing to throw away the lion's share of a seemingly unassailable lead.0 -
What did Sweden do to deserve the attack there earlier this year ?ThreeQuidder said:
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.rkrkrk said:
Thsnks for the response.ThreeQuidder said:
I mean that he doesn't really believe the bit before the but, he's just saying it because he feels he has to.rkrkrk said:
Do you mean that Corbyn is lying and doesn't really believe it?ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
Or that you don't agree with the bit 'before the but'?
So the substance of the speech isn't actually that bad in your eyes?
It's just you don't believe he means it.
So if TM or someone you thought credible gave the speech you wouldn't be appalled by it?0 -
Since when she's released a detailed plan of what Brexit should mean, often ignored in favour of recycled 'Brexit means Brexit' jokes.foxinsoxuk said:
LOL!Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
While May's speeches are full of intellectual argument.
Brexit means Brexit FFS.0 -
No, rather the owners and employees who look to the expertise of private equality companies to build their companies into world beaters. The BBC have built a programme on this principle, 'Dragons Den'.DecrepitJohnL said:
That's shored up the hedge fund vote for the blue team: Mayfair for May.TMA1 said:
Corbyn does not know difference between a hedge fund and a private equity firmWhisperingOracle said:
Correct. The caricatures of his and his team's position on domestic economic policy are the least convincing. In other areas, the caricatures are somewhat nearer the truth.Cyan said:
Corbyn is not any kind of Marxist. From the first page of the Labour manifesto:Pong said:Corbyn isn't a very good marxist.
"Labour understands that the creation of wealth is a collective endeavour between workers, entrepreneurs, investors and government. Each contributes and each must share fairly in the rewards."
That is not what Marxists believe.
http://www.cityam.com/264929/jeremy-corbyns-bizarre-war-city-hedge-funds-continues
'We asked the Labour Party to provide evidence of a hedge fund buying a small business before ‘selling its ideas’ and shutting it down, and the only example that came close to the description involved a private equity firm. When pushed as to whether Corbyn knew the difference between hedge funds and private equity, the conversation ended.'
The point about private equity/venture capital is that they invest in young, emerging companies,but rarely take overall control.
Corbyn buys the Morning Star because it is the only daily media outlet that supports his views. Personally I think we can safely say Corbyn is a marxist. We can be certain he is ignorant.
You comment merely shores up the vote of the thicko communists.0 -
With Ukip backing arch-remained Mary Creagh and Moniker's damascene conversion to Corbynism, truth truly is stranger than fiction.MonikerDiCanio said:
A boring upper middle class pundit .surbiton said:
WTF is Hugo Rifkind ? Is he related to Malcolm Rifkind.ThreeQuidder said:
This, too:blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/8680021577059983360 -
Even then, it doesn't need to be forced down far. 44-45% still gives a healthy majority for any realistic Labour share.blueblue said:
Negative campaigning on things people _actually_ hate does work, whether it's the dementia tax or open borders. The Tories' VI is fine - it's Labour's that needs to be forced back down. And if we still lose, at least we'll have gone down fighting.bobajobPB said:
I reckon that's the trap. The Labour machine is luring the Tories to go heavily negative in the final fortnight. Shades of Remain's Project Fear.blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.0 -
He says that there "will" be more police. But that the intelligence authorities "should" get more resources. Why the difference. Why doesn't he say that they "will" get more resources?TMA1 said:
Yes.ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.
0 -
But the point of Crosby (or people like him) is surely to be across and have a grip on the management of the whole campaign? If Timothy wants to include crap in the manifesto, he crushes it before it gets to the printers, or at least foresees the storm it will cause and has a clear rebuttal.Morris_Dancer said:Sir Norfolk, to be fair, it seems to be Nick Timothy (think I got the name right) who decided to completely **** up the manifesto, not Crosby.
He can't say "not my business, guv... I just come up with one slogan, and typeset the leaflets". So he's either had his role massively overstated, or has screwed up.0 -
In fact, the intelligence services have had a very big increase in resources.Cyclefree said:
He says that there "will" be more police. But that the intelligence authorities "should" get more resources. Why the difference. Why doesn't he say that they "will" get more resources?TMA1 said:
Yes.ThreeQuidder said:
Everything Before The But Is Bollocks.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/868071639061278720
The last sentence effectively says we will support our armed forces and foreign office only if they ''engage with the world'' to surrender to aggression.0 -
Son !surbiton said:
WTF is Hugo Rifkind ? Is he related to Malcolm Rifkind.ThreeQuidder said:
This, too:blueblue said:
Corbyn's policy of open borders and taking unlimited numbers of migrants polls worse than ANY Tory policy, and yet it's being completely unexamined. It's exactly the kind of thing that will blunt Corbyn's advance - if only the Tories could pull their finger out and start hammering it relentlessly!ThreeQuidder said:
Not so much, to be honest.dixiedean said:
Sorry if I've missed something, but hasn't that been the Conservatives campaign so far?blueblue said:
We're 12 days out - people are as positive about the Tories as they're ever going to be in this campaign. What we can do in those 12 days is to make a vote for Jeremy synonymous with letting the terrorists win. And that will stop his ratings rise reaching dangerous levels.MarkSenior said:
Nasty Yes and it will be totally counter productive . Simply shows the Conservatives as a Party with no positive reason(s) to vote for them .blueblue said:Jason said:Could Andrew Neil be the saviour the Tories are looking for tonight?
It's one of the major reasons why I believe Corbyn has made a huge strategic error with his speech today.
In the wake of the Islamist attack in Manchester, his speech has legitimised confronting him over his past associations and sympathies. He has now invited that upon himself.
None of his apologists (and it seems there are quite a few on this very site) can now accuse anyone of playing politics with terror - because he has done so himself. He can't wriggle his way out of a line of questioning now that he perhaps possibly could have before today.
Expect every single utterance he makes to be printed ad nauseum in the Mail, the Sun, and the Express.
Unless, of course, the public want terrorist appeasement as UK foregin policy.
We can only hope. The Tories and their media need to go MASSIVE on this, right now. No politeness, no 'decency', no quarter.
Literally posters of Corbyn on one side, the Manchester attacker on the other, and 'DON'T LET HIM WIN' underneath. Nasty, but effective.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/8680021577059983360 -
Mr. Bobajob, think it was Twain who wrote reality was stranger than fiction, because fiction had to make sense.
Mr. Bobajob (2), I concur with the lack of confidence in May, but I think Corbyn would be an absolute disaster.
Depressing that the debate appears to be a contest of who is the worst/least bad. I think every party leader at the last election was better than the incumbent today.0 -
But where does he say it's our fault?ThreeQuidder said:
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.
He says the blame is with the terrorists.
He just thinks we'd be safer if we stopped invading/bombing other countries.
That doesn't mean we are responsible for terrorism.0 -
As I mentioned earlier, Kosovo shows it's more complex than that. People who want to feel ill about us will find some reason, even when we're trying to help.OblitusSumMe said:
I don't think that we did ourselves any favours in terms of making friends and influencing people with such actions as, say, Sykes-Picot, the Suez War and the coup against Mosaddegh.JosiasJessop said:Then how come terrorism against us by essentially the same groups of people were going on *before* 9/11 and that adventurism?
We have a history of weakening relatively sane secularists when they act against our short-term economic interests. If we could just stop making things worse for a change then perhaps, over time, they would get better.0 -
After the "but".rkrkrk said:
But where does he say it's our fault?ThreeQuidder said:
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.0 -
I'm not seeing it sorry. Okay we'll have to agree to disagree.ThreeQuidder said:
After the "but".rkrkrk said:
But where does he say it's our fault?ThreeQuidder said:
Anybody who says "yes, how awful, blame the terrorists but it's also our fault" I would interpret as them meaning "it's our fault", and would be appalled by it.0 -
I thought you were a lib dem,nothing you could bring us why you think farrons great ?foxinsoxuk said:
LOL!Richard_Nabavi said:
Utter flim-flam, written by a committee, and meaning precisely nothing.rkrkrk said:For those who want to read for themselves - John Rentoul has a transcript of the section on terrorism and foreign policy.
While May's speeches are full of intellectual argument.
Brexit means Brexit FFS.0
