politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could find out how good Corbyn is at herding chickens

CarlottaVance said:

Pop quiz.....which (non trivial) bits of Barnier's remarks did Laura K leave out?

"The UK has decided to leave the EU - it's not the other way round….the consequences are substantial…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/40335399

GeoffM said:

NorthofStoke said:

We now have an unprecedented situation for Britain and possibly for any Western democracy with a first past the post system. [snip]

In the nicest possible way, without any spacing or basic layout that is unreadable.

Slightly less nicely, I ploughed through it anyway and it was unreadable for other reasons too.

RoyalBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The mission isn't get Corbyn into number 10 with 260 seats - that's madness*

The mission is to bring down the government which Brexit means Brexit Tory MPs will do by themselves. There is no Tory majority regardless of the DUP because there are sizeable factions on both wings who will vote against the other. Yes they'll support confidence motions. But I suspect theyll support little else.

And the same goes for a very Minority Corbyn260 government. It'll be an early election

*This is politics. Mad things happen. Just because it's crazy doesn't mean it impossible

You're contradicting yourself. If Tories will support confidence motions, then there'll be no early election.

I know wishful thinking is the left's stock in trade, but this really is getting boring. There will be no early election.

Pulpstar said:

CarlottaVance said:

I wonder if Southern train drivers who've turned down £75,000 will be in favour of socialism?

I'd be tempted to apply if I was living down south !

AndyJS said:

According to the Sunday Times, Julian Brazier spent about a third of the election campaign in the Eltham constituency which the Tories were hoping to win from Labour. The Labour majority went up massively there, and he also lost his own seat in Canterbury by a tiny margin.

SeanT said:

nichomar said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

If May was defeated in a vote of confidence, she would not pack her bags and leave immediately. Rather, she would remain (as Brown did in May 2010 while the Coalition was being formed) until somebody was in a position to go to the Queen with a realistic offer to form a Government commanding the confidence of the House. The strong likelihood would be that the someone would be a new Tory leader who could do a deal as necessary to pass a confidence motion. Or it might be May herself. If 14 days passed following a no confidence vote with no subsequent, successful confidence vote, there would be an election.

Crucially, Corbyn doesn't get to walk into Downing Street on the off-chance he may be able to form a Government from there just because he's leader of the Official Opposition. He has to actually be able to do it to get the keys. The only way for that to happen would be would be (i) if he had either formed a coalition deal with the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and DUP; or (ii) if the Tories confirmed they'd abstain in a confidence motion effectively handing in the keys.

Neither of these are even remotely plausible. There are dangers for the SNP in a flaky coalition, the Lib Dems have already said "no", and the DUP practically invented the word "NO" for people like JC. Meanwhile, for the Tories it would mean going back on everything they've said about the dangers of Corbyn.

So it's either a fresh election or nothing - it's fantasy land to think Labour could form any sort of government on the June result.

It can only happen if sufficient tory MP's felt so stongly that their reasons for defecting or voting againstthe QS outwieghed thier party loyalty. I cant envisage any circumstaces short of a "Suez" type debaclewhich could bring it about, it makes a thread like this good for entertainment but off the scale in probability. Evan if Rees Mogg and co dont get they want they wont let corbyn in.

Quite. The maddest of Hard Tory Brexiteers wouldn't bring down this government and risk Corbyn as prime minister.

Paradoxically, Corbyn's good showing in the GE will have united the Tories: in outright dread of a Marxist Labour victory.

There's a very good chance this government will last to 2020 or beyond.

RoyalBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

RoyalBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The mission isn't get Corbyn into number 10 with 260 seats - that's madness*

The mission is to bring down the government which Brexit means Brexit Tory MPs will do by themselves. There is no Tory majority regardless of the DUP because there are sizeable factions on both wings who will vote against the other. Yes they'll support confidence motions. But I suspect theyll support little else.

And the same goes for a very Minority Corbyn260 government. It'll be an early election

*This is politics. Mad things happen. Just because it's crazy doesn't mean it impossible

You're contradicting yourself. If Tories will support confidence motions, then there'll be no early election.

I know wishful thinking is the left's stock in trade, but this really is getting boring. There will be no early election.

I'm not. Think back to the Major government of 1992. He had a majority May could only dream of. And was incapable of getting anything through other than making them confidence motions. And you can only do a couple of those before authority has gone hence him resigning.

DUP or not the Tories only have a majority to pass confidence motions. That's it. On pretty much everything else chaos will reign. And the longer it goes on the greater the damage to their 'natural party of government' image

If Major had fallen early, he would have been replaced by Kinnock, Smith or Blair. Hardly the end of the world.

You are suggesting that Tory rebels would let a man into Downing Street who has no respect for the rule of law and openly sympathises with terrorist groups.

You clearly know nothing about what motivates people to join the Tory Party. Much easier to just think we're evil monsters who hate the poor.

Much easier!

Sean_F said:

IanB2 said:

SeanT said:

nichomar said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

If May was defeated in a vote of confidence, she would not pack her bags and leave immediately. Rather, she would remain (as Brown did in May 2010 while the Coalition was being formed) until somebody was in a position to go to the Queen with a realistic offer to form a Government commanding the confidence of the House. The strong likelihood would be that the election.

Crucially, Corbyn doesn't get to walk into Downing Street on the off-chance he may be able to form a Government from there just because he's leader of the Official Opposition. He has to actually be able to do it to get the keys. The only way for that to happen would be would be (i) if he had either formed a coalition deal with the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and DUP; or (ii) if the Tories confirmed they'd abstain in a confidence motion effectively handing in the keys.

Neither of these are even remotely plausible. There are dangers for the SNP in a flaky coalition, the Lib Dems have already said "no", and the DUP practically invented the word "NO" for people like JC. Meanwhile, for the Tories it would mean going back on everything they've said about the dangers of Corbyn.

So it's either a fresh election or nothing - it's fantasy land to think Labour could form any sort of government on the June result.

It can only happen if sufficient tory MP's felt so stongly that their reasons for defecting or voting againstthe QS outwieghed thier party loyalty. I cant envisage any circumstaces short of a "Suez" type debaclewhich could bring it about, it makes a thread like this good for entertainment but off the scale in probability. Evan if Rees Mogg and co dont get they want they wont let corbyn in.

Quite. The maddest of Hard Tory Brexiteers wouldn't bring down this government and risk Corbyn as prime minister.

Paradoxically, Corbyn's good showing in the GE will have united the Tories: in outright dread of a Marxist Labour victory.

There's a very good chance this government will last to 2020 or beyond.

You may be right. But its fundamental illegitimacy will be the final undoing of the Conservatives at next GE.

There is no comparison with the 2010 deal, two parties forming a coalition from opposition with the smaller being a national party with 50+ seats and nearly a quarter of the GB vote, and the 2017 position with ten of the least moderate unionists from the back end of the kingdom with not even 1% of the UK vote propping up a newly defeated government.

The government is hardly illegitimate, unless one assumes it is illegitimate for Northern Ireland to be represented in the Commons.

Jonathan said:

JackW said:

Final French Parliamentary Results - ERM Maj 123 - Full Results :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40178118

Perhaps you should explain what Maj means.

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

MarkHopkins said:

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

Well Labour have chosen a terrorist-loving, Marxist-believing, nutcase for a leader - who would quite literally rip up the country to achieve his aims. It'll take a while for the Tories to beat that...

SeanT said:

IanB2 said:

Sean_F said:

IanB2 said:

SeanT said:

nichomar said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

If May was fantasy land to think Labour could form any sort of government on the June result.

It can only happen if sufficient tory MP's felt so stongly that their reasons for defecting or voting againstthe QS outwieghed thier party loyalty. I cant envisage any circumstaces short of a "Suez" type debaclewhich could bring it about, it makes a thread like this good for entertainment but off the scale in probability. Evan if Rees Mogg and co dont get they want they wont let corbyn in.

Quite. The maddest of Hard Tory Brexiteers wouldn't bring down this government and risk Corbyn as prime minister.

Paradoxically, Corbyn's good showing in the GE will have united the Tories: in outright dread of a Marxist Labour victory.

There's a very good chance this government will last to 2020 or beyond.

You may be right. But its fundamental illegitimacy will be the final undoing of the Conservatives at next GE.

There is no comparison with the 2010 deal, two parties forming a coalition from opposition with the smaller being a national party with 50+ seats and nearly a quarter of the GB vote, and the 2017 position with ten of the least moderate unionists from the back end of the kingdom with not even 1% of the UK vote propping up a newly defeated government.

The government is hardly illegitimate, unless one assumes it is illegitimate for Northern Ireland to be represented in the Commons.

Ultimately it will be the UK electorate that gets the final say on that.

One thing to note: Corbyn is 68. Will the British people really elect him as PM in 2021, say, when he will be 72? A doddery old Trotskyite?

At some point the weird shine will go off him. Tories just need to hold their nerve, and get a better leader.

IanB2 said:

Sean_F said:

IanB2 said:

SeanT said:

nichomar said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

If May was defeated in a vote of confidence, she would not pack her bags and leave immediately. Rather, she would remain (as Brown did in May 2010 while the Coalition was being formed) until somebody was in a position to go to the Queen with a realistic offer to form a Government commanding the confidence of the House. The strong likelihood would be that the election.

Crucially, Corbyn doesn't get to walk into Downing Street on the off-chance he may be able to form a Government from there just because he's leader of the Official Opposition. He has to actually be able to do it to get the keys. The only way for that to happen would be would be (i) if he had either formed a coalition deal with the SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and DUP; or (ii) if the Tories confirmed they'd abstain in a confidence motion effectively handing in the keys.

Neither of these are even remotely plausible.

So it's either a fresh election or nothing - it's fantasy land to think Labour could form any sort of government on the June result.

It can only happen if sufficient tory MP's felt so stongly that their reasons for defecting or voting againstthe QS outwieghed thier party loyalty. I cant envisage any circumstaces short of a "Suez" type debaclewhich could bring it about, it makes a thread like this good for entertainment but off the scale in probability. Evan if Rees Mogg and co dont get they want they wont let corbyn in.

Quite. The maddest of Hard Tory Brexiteers wouldn't bring down this government and risk Corbyn as prime minister.

Paradoxically, Corbyn's good showing in the GE will have united the Tories: in outright dread of a Marxist Labour victory.

There's a very good chance this government will last to 2020 or beyond.

You may be right. But its fundamental illegitimacy will be the final undoing of the Conservatives at next GE.

There is no comparison with the 2010 deal, two parties forming a coalition from opposition with the smaller being a national party with 50+ seats and nearly a quarter of the GB vote, and the 2017 position with ten of the least moderate unionists from the back end of the kingdom with not even 1% of the UK vote propping up a newly defeated government.

The government is hardly illegitimate, unless one assumes it is illegitimate for Northern Ireland to be represented in the Commons.

Ultimately it will be the UK electorate that gets the final say.

Jonathan said:

MarkHopkins said:

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

Well Labour have chosen a terrorist-loving, Marxist-believing, nutcase for a leader - who would quite literally rip up the country to achieve his aims. It'll take a while for the Tories to beat that...

After a referendum and an election both designed to shore up the Tory party , I think they're in a league if their own when it comes to shambolic buffoonery.

Bobajob_PB said:

RochdalePioneers said:

RoyalBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The mission isn't get Corbyn into number 10 with 260 seats - that's madness*

snip

I'm not. Think back to the Major government of 1992. He had a majority May could only dream of. And was incapable of getting anything through other than making them confidence motions. And you can only do a couple of those before authority has gone hence him resigning.

DUP or not the Tories only have a majority to pass confidence motions. That's it. On pretty much everything else chaos will reign. And the longer it goes on the greater the damage to their 'natural party of government' image

I think that's right. The PB Tory "We'll Go On and On" wing tend to be youthful I think, I'd venture that many of them are too young to remember the shambles of the mid 1990s. Now, in a technical sense, they are right - the May zombie government can limp on with qualified DUP support indefinitely, but it will struggle to pass laws. McDonnell knows the game is afoot so I'd expect him to pack the house and - probably - abandon pairing on the point of principle that the government itself is not playing cricket by running scared of an autumn poll, when May went to the country with a question and got an answer. The Liberals have no incentive to prop up a euroshambling Tory party, indeed I would expect them to gain seats if there was an autumn election. Then we have the outside chance of Sinn Fein popping in at any moment if they think their votes might bring down the government and/or secure a border poll. We will of course be assured this is impossible. Trump and Brexit were impossible once.

Imagine you are the PM, the only person in the country who can throw in the towel on the QS and give Corbyn a shot. Do you? No.

Imagine you are JC, the most likely person in the country to go to HMQ in the event of the above. Can you command a majority? No.

Imagine you are the PM, the only person in the country who can call an early election. Do you? No.

This parliament has the capacity to be immensely damaging to CON and DUP, but it will last, just like Major 1992 and the Lib-Lab pact lasted.

Bobajob_PB said:

rcs1000 said:

GeoffM said:

nichomar said:

Having just watched Rees Mogg on skt news he believes leaving the EU is easy and not at all complicated so there's no need toworry or be concerned. I must have missed something along the way or he just has a superior intellect to my meagre brain.

Yes

Leaving the EU is, of course, simple. You repeal the European Communities Act and related legislation.

One could also eschew negotiation and exit to WTO terms. (Which means the "Most Favoured Nation" terms the EU extends all countries with whom it does not have special arrangements.)

There are two reasons why this is sub-optimal.

The first issue is that the EU has trade relations with almost all of our biggest trading partners, and a disorganised exit would (negatively) reset our trade arrangements with these countries too.

The EU has trade agreements - not necessarily complete FTAs, but agreements that cover mutual recognition of standards, double taxation, rules on re-export, etc. - with the world's largest economies. There are treaties between the EU and the US, the EU and China, the EU and Australia and the EU and New Zealand, for example. There are also a lot of EU free trade deals: Canada, Mexico, South Korea, Colombia, Chile, Morocco, Israel, South Africa and a host of other places.
snip

ed international boundaries a dozen times, as copper was mined, refined, spun, put into a part, that was made into a component, that was sent to final assembly, before heading to a distribution centre, and finally arriving in the UK. Tariffs cannot simply be "made up" by devaluation, as devaluation makes importing components more expensive. If something went from Germany to the UK to France then it might be cheaper (given the possibility of tariffs upon tariffs) for it to stay inside the EU. (And even if the tariffs are eliminated, remember that firms like to run with essentially zero inventory. If there's one supplier where things sit waiting for a customs inspection for two days, that will negatively impact it.)

Now, I'm not saying this makes a deal between the EU and the UK unlikely. It's in everyone's interests (most importantly politicians who wish to be re-elected) to make a deal. But do not underestimate the potential damage to the UK economy from a disorderly exit.

Given you know all this, why the hell did you vote Leave? Should have listened to your father.

rcs1000 said:

Leaving the EU is, of course, simple. You repeal the European Communities Act and related legislation.

One could also eschew negotiation and exit to WTO terms. (Which means the "Most Favoured Nation" terms the EU extends all countries with whom it does not have special arrangements.)

There are two reasons why this is sub-optimal.

The first issue is that the EU has trade relations with almost all of our biggest trading partners, and a disorganised exit would (negatively) reset our trade arrangements with these countries too.

The EU has trade agreements - not necessarily complete FTAs, but agreements that cover mutual recognition of standards, double taxation, rules on re-export, etc. - with the world's largest economies. There are treaties between the EU and the US, the EU and China, the EU and Australia and the EU and New Zealand, for example. There are also a lot of EU free trade deals: Canada, Mexico, South Korea, Colombia, Chile, Morocco, Israel, South Africa and a host of other places.

If we crash out of the EU with no agreements in place, we need to open negotiations with all these countries too. I know it's tempting to say "oh, these guys will all want free trade agreements with us", and that's probably true. But FTAs typically take a long-time to negotiate: I am always amused that the China-Maldive FTA - which should be the simplest agreement on the planet - is in its sixth year of negotiations.

Secondly, I think people forget how international supply chains are these days. Pick up any consumer product (or look at your car). Some bits will have crossed international boundaries a dozen times, as copper was mined, refined, spun, put into a part, that was made into a component, that was sent to final assembly, before heading to a distribution centre, and finally arriving in the UK. Tariffs cannot simply be "made up" by devaluation, as devaluation makes importing components more expensive. If something went from Germany to the UK to France then it might be cheaper (given the possibility of tariffs upon tariffs) for it to stay inside the EU. (And even if the tariffs are eliminated, remember that firms like to run with essentially zero inventory. If there's one supplier where things sit waiting for a customs inspection for two days, that will negatively impact it.)

Now, I'm not saying this makes a deal between the EU and the UK unlikely. It's in everyone's interests (most importantly politicians who wish to be re-elected) to make a deal. But do not underestimate the potential damage to the UK economy from a disorderly exit.

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

We're thinking of invading Mars.

Bobajob_PB said:

rcs1000 said:

Bobajob_PB said:

Given you know all this, why the hell did you vote Leave? Should have listened to your father.

As I have written many times, I do not believe the United Kingdom is a good fit for the EU political project. Ultimately, the EU will either collapse, or end up as a state. (Or most likely, some subset of the EU will end up as a state.)

We have never been happy with the political project of the EU. Attempting to force the UK to become a part of a federal country called Europe was never going to end well.

If I made a mistake, it was an assumption that the Conservative government would act rationally and would recognise that exiting the EU was a multi-year journey, and not something best achieved by a stiff upper lip and a 20 month "negotiation".

My fear, currently, is that the government will come up with a deal that satisfies nobody in 18 months. That this fails to pass the Commons, and that we crash out to Hard Brexit, with no agreements with other countries in place. I suspect this will lead to a substantial drop in investment in the UK, and to the prime London property market being hammered. Given that we already live beyond our means, this will likely lead to a long and serious recession, that will result in Corbyn being elected (Syriza-like) with a large majority to destroy the country further.

Basically, I'm petrified by the stupidity of our politicians.

A long way of writing "my dad was right". Your philosophical reasons for leaving outweighed by the disastrous consequences of doing so.

MarkHopkins said:

Jonathan said:

MarkHopkins said:

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

Well Labour have chosen a terrorist-loving, Marxist-believing, nutcase for a leader - who would quite literally rip up the country to achieve his aims. It'll take a while for the Tories to beat that...

After a referendum and an election both designed to shore up the Tory party , I think they're in a league if their own when it comes to shambolic buffoonery.

Are you complaining that the Tories put democracy above their own party?

nunuone said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

nunu said:

Corbyn is the hero now and May the villain. No matter what she does it will be wrong. Damaged beyond repair.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-mosque-attack-jeremy-corbyn-and-theresa-may-address-worshippers-at-finsbury-park-mosque-a3568306.html

Personality cult.

I am beginning to think that the outlook for the Tories is not quite as bad as it might be. Corbyn has star quality - the IRA attack video which I stupidly touted as the Tory secret weapon was watchable because of this - the way he came across in the clips made you think Sean Bean would play him in the biopic. The fact remains though that he is as mad as a meat axe and his cronies are worse, and unless the present big moderate beasts of labour can do a very tricky Vicar of Bray realignment over the summer the party is going to be a very obvious mess by conference time. We know some very useful things from the ge, not least that the young have stopped not voting, and that some pork in the shape of university fee reductions needs directing their way, and that t may makes chocolate fireguards look sternly utilitarian. Fix those points and we are back in business.

Was there really a surge of youth turnout? I thought it was due to middle aged and older people swinging Labour more than usual?

Youth turnout rose from 43% to 57% according to the eerily accurate YouGov model. I'd call that a surge.

Casino_Royale said:

Jonathan said:

Wondering what mad scheme the Tories are going to cook up and then cock up next.

We're thinking of invading Mars.

CarlottaVance said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Second like Jezza!

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Second like Corbyn

Which of you is Diane Abbott?

Casino_Royale said:

RochdalePioneers said:

RoyalBlue said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The mission isn't get Corbyn into number 10 with 260 seats - that's madness*

The mission is to bring down the government which Brexit means Brexit Tory MPs will do by themselves. There is no Tory majority regardless of the DUP because there are sizeable factions on both wings who will vote against the other. Yes they'll support confidence motions. But I suspect theyll support little else.

And the same goes for a very Minority Corbyn260 government. It'll be an early election

*This is politics. Mad things happen. Just because it's crazy doesn't mean it impossible

You're contradicting yourself. If Tories will support confidence motions, then there'll be no early election.

I know wishful thinking is the left's stock in trade, but this really is getting boring. There will be no early election.

I'm not. Think back to the Major government of 1992. He had a majority May could only dream of. And was incapable of getting anything through other than making them confidence motions. And you can only do a couple of those before authority has gone hence him resigning.

DUP or not the Tories only have a majority to pass confidence motions. That's it. On pretty much everything else chaos will reign. And the longer it goes on the greater the damage to their 'natural party of government' image

Maastricht, which arguably got us into this mess, and created the EU in its current form, was passed under the Major government.

By one vote.

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Bobajob_PB said:

rcs1000 said:

GeoffM said:

nichomar said:

Having just watched Rees Mogg on skt news he believes leaving the EU is easy and not at all complicated so there's no need toworry or be concerned. I must have missed something along the way or he just has a superior intellect to my meagre brain.

Yes

Leaving the EU is, of course, simple. You repeal the European Communities Act and related legislation.

One could also eschew negotiation and exit to WTO terms. (Which means the "Most Favoured Nation" terms the EU extends all countries with whom it does not have special arrangements.)

The first issue is that the EU has trade relations with almost all of our biggest trading partners, and a disorganised exit would (negatively) reset our trade arrangements with these countries too.

The EU has trade agreements - not necessarily complete FTAs, but agreements that cover mutual recognition of standards, double taxation, rules on re-export, etc. - with the world's largest economies. There are treaties between the EU and the US, the EU and China, the EU and Australia and the EU and New Zealand, for example. There are also a lot of EU
snip

ed international boundaries a dozen times, as copper was mined, refined, spun, put into a part, that was made into a component, that was sent to final assembly, before heading to a distribution centre, and finally arriving in the UK. Tariffs cannot simply be "made up" by devaluation, as devaluation makes importing components more expensive. If something went from Germany to the UK to France then it might be cheaper (given the possibility of tariffs upon tariffs) for it to stay inside the EU. (And even if the tariffs are eliminated, remember that firms like to run with essentially zero inventory. If there's one supplier where things sit waiting for a customs inspection for two days, that will negatively impact it.)

Now, I'm not saying this makes a deal between the EU and the UK unlikely. It's in everyone's interests (most importantly politicians who wish to be re-elected) to make a deal. But do not underestimate the potential damage to the UK economy from a disorderly exit.

Given you know all this, why the hell did you vote Leave? Should have listened to your father.

Because it is not all about trade and economics. Economically we would be far better off as the 51st state of the US or as a vassal of China. I don't see too many people pushing for those options.

The fatal flaw in the Remainers' argument has always been to assert that EU membership is about trade and nothing else. That just insults peoples' intelligence.

GeoffM said:

nichomar said:

Beverley_C said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

Talking of the yoof vote, I was with my girlfriend last night, and she told me a very interesting and personal political story.

Apparently, when she was about 14 or 15, there was one street in Tooting which she basically HAD to walk down, to get home from school. Unfortunately, this street was patrolled by lots of Muslim men, mainly young, but some old, and they would sexually harass her continuously.

And this wasn't just wolf-whistling or cat-calling, it was very aggressive: "come here you slut", "show us your tits you little white whore", "suck my" etc etc. Sometimes she would be grabbed, physically, and teased. And it was ONLY Muslim men that did this. She got unwelcome attention from others, but the really horrible, frightening stuff - it was just Muslim males.

Recall that my girlfriend is Corbynite, hippychick, feminist, multilcultural. For her to come out and say this about Muslims was, to me, quite shocking

There is an upside. She and her mum (a very lefty teacher) were so incensed by this behaviour, they went to their local MP, Sadiq Khan. Who was, she says, very understanding and very helpful, seeing her in person several times, and following up with phone calls, and she doesn't know what he did but after she complained the harassment considerably reduced. It didn't stop, but it got noticeably better - though she has no idea what it is like now.

So three cheers for Sadiq Khan. It has made me warm to him.

Hasn't done much for my opinion of Islam, tho.

Is that the vibrancy which comes with living in a world city ?

No... it is just the misogynistic sh*t that many women have to put up on a regular basis.

Reading SeanT's anecdote did not shock me in the least. Unwelcome, insulting and aggressive attention towards women happens all too frequently and not always in streets in Tooting. Being told to "Show us yer tits" or "Get 'em out for the lads" is practically a Rite of Passage for women as is physical assault.

How would any of you lot feel if some stranger sexually molested you in the street while his mates cheered him on? I mean, actually physically molested you, running their hand over your body or genitals?

Sean's anecdote is all too believable. Ask your wives, daughters, sisters, etc.

But not restricted to one particular section of society. I was at a football match where the ref was female and sections of the crowd chanted "get your t*** out for the lads"

And did she?

rcs1000 said:

Basically, I'm petrified by the stupidity of our politicians.

SeanT said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Ishmael_Z said:

GeoffM said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

Ishmael_Z said:

RobD said:

nunu said:

Corbyn is the hero now and-park-mosque-a3568306.html

.

Ironically swinging leftward is the best way to ruin the future of their children.

You know that and I know that....

But actually ... I was talking to an undergraduate the other day who said all her friends envied her for being an only child because it meant she might one day own a house. I found that tragic, and if we were to undergo the mother of all recessions it would arguably be a net benefit to that generation, if it came with the mother of all house price crashes

Talking of the yoof vote, I was with my girlfriend last night, and she told me a very interesting and personal political story.

Apparently, when she was about 14 or 15, there was one street in Tooting which she basically HAD to walk down, to get home from school. Unfortunately, this street was patrolled by lots of Muslim men, mainly young, but some old, and they would sexually harass her continuously.

And this wasn't just wolf-whistling or cat-calling, it was very aggressive: "come here you slut", "show us your tits you little white whore", "suck my" etc etc. Sometimes she would be grabbed, physically, and teased. And it was ONLY Muslim men that did this. She got unwelcome attention from others, but the really horrible, frightening stuff - it was just Muslim males.

Recall that my girlfriend is Corbynite, hippychick, feminist, multilcultural. For her to come out and say this about Muslims was, to me, quite shocking

There is an upside. She and her mum (a very lefty teacher) were so incensed by this behaviour, they went to their local MP, Sadiq Khan. Who was, she says, very understanding and very helpful, seeing her in person several times, and following up with phone calls, and she doesn't know what he did but after she complained the harassment considerably reduced. It didn't stop, but it got noticeably better - though she has no idea what it is like now.

So three cheers for Sadiq Khan. It has made me warm to him.

Hasn't done much for my opinion of Islam, tho.

Horrible experience.

As a matter of interest did Sadiq Khan involve the police? It is likely that other girls were subjected to similar verbal abuse. What if there were girls for whom it went beyond that?

another_richard said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Bobajob_PB said:

rcs1000 said:

GeoffM said:

nichomar said:

Having just watched Rees Mogg on skt news he believes leaving the EU is easy and not at all complicated so there's no need toworry or be concerned. I must have missed something along the way or he just has a superior intellect to my meagre brain.

Yes

Leaving the EU is, of course, simple. You repeal the European Communities Act and related legislation.

One could also eschew negotiation and exit to WTO terms. (Which means the "Most Favoured Nation" terms the EU extends all countries with whom it does not have special arrangements.)

The first issue is that the EU has trade relations with almost all of our biggest trading partners, and a disorganised exit would (negatively) reset our trade arrangements with these countries too.

The EU has trade agreements - not necessarily complete FTAs, but agreements that cover mutual recognition of standards, double taxation, rules on re-export, etc. - with the world's largest economies. There are treaties between the EU and the US, the EU and China, the EU and Australia and the EU and New Zealand, for example. There are also a lot of EU
snip

ed international boundaries a dozen times, as copper was mined, refined, spun, put into a part, that was made into a component, that was sent to final assembly, before heading to a distribution centre, and finally arriving in the UK. Tariffs cannot ely impact it.)

Now, I'm not saying this makes a deal between the EU and the UK unlikely. It's in everyone's interests (most importantly politicians who wish to be re-elected) to make a deal. But do not underestimate the potential damage to the UK economy from a disorderly exit.

Given you know all this, why the hell did you vote Leave? Should have listened to your father.

Because it is not all about trade and economics. Economically we would be far better off as the 51st state of the US or as a vassal of China. I don't see too many people pushing for those options.

The fatal flaw in the Remainers' argument has always been to assert that EU membership is about trade and nothing else. That just insults peoples' intelligence.

WilliamGlenn's honesty on this issue is refreshing.

SeanT said:

nichomar said:

Beverley_C said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

Talking of the yoof vote, I was with my girlfriend last night, and she told me a very interesting and personal political story.

Apparently, whas no idea what it is like now.

So three cheers for Sadiq Khan. It has made me warm to him.

Hasn't done much for my opinion of Islam, tho.

Is that the vibrancy which comes with living in a world city ?

No... it is just the misogynistic sh*t that many women have to put up on a regular basis.

Reading SeanT's anecdote did not shock me in the least. Unwelcome, insulting and aggressive attention towards women happens all too frequently and not always in streets in Tooting. Being told to "Show us yer tits" or "Get 'em out for the lads" is practically a Rite of Passage for women as is physical assault.

How would any of you lot feel if some stranger sexually molested you in the street while his mates cheered him on? I mean, actually physically molested you, running their hand over your body or genitals?

Sean's anecdote is all too believable. Ask your wives, daughters, sisters, etc.

But not restricted to one particular section of society. I was at a football match where the ref was female and sections of the crowd chanted "get your t*** out for the lads"

Stop being blind. Yes, men have behaved like halfwits towards women since Time Began.

But there is a definite *edge* to Muslim misogyny which puts it in a different league. It is simultaneously aggressive, entitled, racist and contemptuous. The white girl or kaffir woman is by definition a slut - walking the street alone, in a skirt, makes her a whore, and fair game. Hence Rochdale, Rotherham and a hundred other towns.

We need to accept these attitudes are out there. My GF was quite specific. She only got the really unpleasant, frightening abuse from Muslim men.

rpjs said:

I notice there has been much talk of "confidence motions" on this thread. Let's not forget that there is no longer any such thing except for a motion in the exact form of words defined in S.2(4) of the FTPA. The Queen's Speech vote is no longer a confidence motion, a supply vote is no longer a confidence motion. Only a motion "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government." is now a confidence motion.

This does lead me to ask what will happen if the government incidentally loses a supply vote (which is how Callaghan's government fell in 1979). It might feel bound to resign, but it will still require a FTPA vote (either of confidence or less likely a 2/3 vote for a dissolution) to trigger a dissolution and the outgoing government could quite conceivably it could win it. What happens then? Does the Queen have to commission the LOTO to try to form a government, wait for him to fail and summon back the Tory leader to have another go?

What if the government decides it isn't bound to resign any more through losing a supply vote, but only if it loses a FTPA vote? Would the Queen feel herself bound to dismiss the government and summon the LOTO who would fail to secure a majority himself? We could end up with no legitimate government and no way to force a new election.

nichomar said:

GeoffM said:

nichomar said:

Beverley_C said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

Talking of the yoof vote, I was with my girlfriend last night, and she told me a very interesting and personal political story.

Apparently, when she was about 14 or 15, there was one street in Tooting which she basically HAD to walk down, to get home from school. Unfortunately, this street was patrolled by lots of Muslim men, mainly young, but some old, and they would sexually harass her continuously.

And this wasn't just wolf-whistling or cat-calling, it was very aggressive: "come here you slut", "show us your tits you little white whore", "suck my" etc etc. Sometimes she would be grabbed, physically, and teased. And it was ONLY Muslim men that did this. She got unwelcome attention from others, but the really horrible, frightening stuff - it was just Muslim males.

Recall that my girlfriend is Corbynite, hippychick, feminist, multilcultural. For her to come out and say this about Muslims was, to me, quite shocking

There is an upside. She and her mum (a very lefty teacher) were so incensed by this behaviour, they went to their local MP, Sadiq Khan. Who was, she says, very understanding and very helpful, seeing her in person several times, and following up with phone calls, and she doesn't know what he did but after she complained the harassment considerably reduced. It didn't stop, but it got noticeably better - though she has no idea what it is like now.

So three cheers for Sadiq Khan. It has made me warm to him.

Hasn't done much for my opinion of Islam, tho.

Is that the vibrancy which comes with living in a world city ?

No... it is just the misogynistic sh*t that many women have to put up on a regular basis.

Reading SeanT's anecdote did not shock me in the least. Unwelcome, insulting and aggressive attention towards women happens all too frequently and not always in streets in Tooting. Being told to "Show us yer tits" or "Get 'em out for the lads" is practically a Rite of Passage for women as is physical assault.

How would any of you lot feel if some stranger sexually molested you in the street while his mates cheered him on? I mean, actually physically molested you, running their hand over your body or genitals?

Sean's anecdote is all too believable. Ask your wives, daughters, sisters, etc.

But not restricted to one particular section of society. I was at a football match where the ref was female and sections of the crowd chanted "get your t*** out for the lads"

And did she?

Actually she handled it very wel, waved to the crowd and got on with her job but should she have had to?

SeanT said:

This fucking heat is unbearable!

9.20pm and my flat is still 29C inside, as against 27C outside.

Jeez.

Bobajob_PB said:

Mortimer said:

Thanks to Robert for his repeated message about why he voted Leave.

Could those who think Brexit dead please explain how they'd explain to the population who voted to Leave that we're not in fact going to leave. And how they expect to avoid the civil strife that would likely erupt following the erosion of democracy?

Right winger talking up riots? Who'd a thunk it?