Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters still make next year the favourite for TMay to stand d
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters still make next year the favourite for TMay to stand down
Betdata.io
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Edit:
https://twitter.com/mattchorley/status/988441375464140801
Why say this? You know the opposition and the media are going to use this as a stick to beat the government with if this isn’t the case....
"Labour candidate under 14 civil restraint orders said Jo Cox death 'bereft of evidence'"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/04/23/labour-candidate-said-jo-cox-death-bereft-evidence-posted-conspiracy/
Is this what 'old fashioned' immigration officers used to do?
e.g.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/722794649379848192
Also the treatment to the Windrush group was evidenced by Rudd back to 2005 and under various labour home secretaries
https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/988436124963082241?s=19
https://order-order.com/2018/04/23/two-more-labour-candidates-blasted-illegal-sexuality-women-and-jewish-money/
Guido’s clearly enjoying this, and it’s not going to go away until Labour take a long hard look at those who are standing in their name. Something they show no intention of doing.
The ward has a longstanding large British Asian population and a large Polish population as well. The ward elected 3 Tory Cllrs in 2006 but those days are long gone.
That 1968 London map will be reversed in London.......
'......she is banned from bringing court actions without a judge's permission after false and vexatious claims against MI5, MI6, the Metropolitan police, the army, Thames Water, her gas, electricity and broadband suppliers, Royal Mail, Hackney council, her GP and the freeholder of her flat'.
https://twitter.com/pollymackenzie/status/986286214985732097?s=20
Most I can find on Labour and hostile environment is that Johnson used the term in a speech, not the policy we’ve seen in the last few years: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/6114549/emily-thornberry-admits-labour-were-first-to-suggest-hostile-environment-for-immigrants-as-she-wades-into-windrush-row/amp/
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2018/04/selection-mandy-richards-exposes-longterm-problem-how-labour-vets
She also made some claims that various hospitals were "in on it" and in one case gave her a contraceptive implant without her consent. That claim will be assessed on its merits, after one letter did mention an implant - probably mistakenly.
"longlisted candidate in Hornsey and Wood Green in 2013"
(https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2018/04/selection-mandy-richards-exposes-longterm-problem-how-labour-vets)
Have they got a death wish as a party?
Ms Thornberry said that the creation of a “hostile environment” policy could have affected the way that Home Office officials approach their work. But she was forced to concede that the term had first been used by Labour Home Secretaty Alan Johnson in a 2010 speech.
“It is right that we should have rules, and they should be enforced, and they should be done fairly and done fast and it should be firm. I have no problem with that,” she said.
“But to lift that phrasing and embed it and strengthen it, and make it so much sharper and nastier, that was the difference.”
“The words were used [under Labour], but the culture was not.”
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/politics/news/94572/emily-thornberry-calls-amber-rudd-quit-over-windrush-scandal
It is all a question of fact and degree. The Tories went further.
A clampdown has been launched targeting "foreigners [who] come to this country illegitimately and steal our benefits", home secretary John Reid has said.
The plan is to stop illegal immigrants getting housing, healthcare or work.
He said the UK was now "throwing out" record numbers of asylum seekers and he hoped to make life "constrained and uncomfortable" for illegal immigrants.
"constrained and uncomfortable" but not "hostile" apparently...!!!!!
If there’s so much mistrust about the vetting process then they need to bring in external vettors to write a report on each candidate. It would have taken two minutes of internet research to see that this woman was a vexatious litigant with a massively over-active imagination, and completely unsuitable to stand for Parliament in a target seat.
There’s now a number of journalists all over the story, which ironically might help the party get the worst candidates removed well in advance of the next general election.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2006/oct/17/prisonsandprobation.ukcrime1
Or maybe it is?
Thankfully never again will people like that get near power under Corbyn
The government still looks worse, but Labour would be well advised not to lay it on so thick, since I very much doubt some very senior people did not say things that have the appearance of the same attitude as the government now. There isn't a need to overplay things, this scandal is damaging the government with very little effort needed from labour.
The banning of deep-scan pornography (which I'd never heard of prior to the ban news, but involves having a celebrity's face pasted [convincingly] onto an adult actress' body) suggests that technology has reached a pretty advanced stage. However, it also suggests that copyright and the right to one's own image remains protected under the law.
1) Theresa May goes this year.
2) Theresa May privately agrees that she'll go when the Brexit job is done. But that isn't on 29 March 2019, there's a long term deal to negotiate.
3) Theresa May decides that she isn't going to go quietly full stop and the Conservative party acquiesces in this, next year at least, because all the alternatives look just as unappetising as they do right now.
Treating people as numbers is the root of many evils.
Getting hysterical about how awful a hostile atmosphere is when you've at least appeared very hostile on the issue, at least deflects from the actually important issue of the impacts of the policy itself. Just continue to point out the current impacts and failure to fix it, and let the public draw the conclusion, being very critical without opening themselves open to attack should be the order of the day. The focus on atmosphere, which leads into a discussion on, among other things, language, leads away from the more important issues.
The FT has come out in favour of remaining in the Customs Union:
https://www.ft.com/content/b589b0c4-46f2-11e8-8ee8-cae73aab7ccb
DETAILS OF TRIGGER WARNING
The FT uses rational arguments in favour of its position and is critical of Leavers for failing to come up with an alternative.
Recommended counter-measure: ad hominem.
* (a misleading term, because many of the people affected came here much later, but it will do as shorthand)
And even putting that aside, I'm sure you understand why Rudd isn't winning plaudits for a reaction she was very visibly forced into by mass media coverage after years of not giving a shit.
The refresh/updates for discussion threads is not working like it was a couple of weeks (months?) ago. I noticed that another poster remarked the same thing, but nothing has changed.
It is really fcuking annoying, and you will lose a lot of viewings as a result. You see the number of comments increase, press refresh, but SWA happens.
Great site, love the diverse range of views, but this really sucks, as you cannot go with the flow of the threads. Get it fixed, and I may even move from being a lurker.
Advances in video technology are pretty scary. It’s already pretty much good enough to take a video of someone speaking and change their words completely. Pretty scary if you’re a public figure or a candidate for election.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=AmUC4m6w1wo
Perhaps that's all the encouragement needed to move from being a lurker?
Welcome.
It is really annoying, as it happens on my mobile, which I use to read PB whilst out and about, when I cannot shift to another device.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/20/its-inhumane-the-windrush-victims-who-have-lost-jobs-homes-and-loved-ones
Having gone to Jamaica for his 50th birthday [in 2010] – his first visit since arriving in Britain aged six – Robinson was told at the airport he could not return on his Jamaican passport. He lived in bedsits and hostels for 21 months, until a solicitor resolved the case. On his return in 2011, however, he was told he owed £4,500 for unpaid rent and council tax. Taken to court and evicted, Robinson has been sofa-surfing since.
and
Having moved from Jamaica 51 years ago, aged six, the benefits agency challenged O’Connor’s immigration status last summer after she lost her job in the computer shop where she had worked for 16 years. Several potential new employers withdrew offers upon realising she had no passport. She had to sell her car and was facing bankruptcy in March. After her story was publicised last month, the Home Office promised to waive her fees for a biometric card application.
and
Francis came from Jamaica with his two sisters when he was about seven, to join their parents. He worked on repairing Royal Navy ships but after being made redundant four years ago, no one will employ him because he does not have a passport or other proof of his right to live and work in the UK.
and many more.
Don't get me wrong - these and the other cases are awful, but the root cause goes back decades.
I now expect the Government to lose virtually every single amendment there.
Or, she’s batshit crazy.
But she writes lucidly.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/19/windrush-generation-tell-of-holidays-that-led-to-exile-and-heartbreak
Another example in that article also show how the problem existed under Labour:
Junior Green, 61... Despite having the letter, he said the problems began when he lost the passport containing the stamp. Attempts to get his new Jamaican passport stamped with the indefinite leave to remain were rebuffed by the Home Office in 2009 and 2014, he says, because he was unable to furnish them with proof of 10 years of continuous residence, even though he had the 1993 letter.
As I said, kudos to Amber for finally getting a grip on this. It's fair enough to criticise Theresa May for introducing the 2012 Act without addressing with the long-existing problems, but I really don't see how Amber Rudd can be blamed for it, nor do I see how Labour can claim the moral high ground.
I am not sure what the issue is, but I have had problems with safari (cannot refresh (or even login!?!) via iPhone/iPad), but am now logging in via another app, which seems to work. It is still a bit shit, if I am honest, and if all other posters go through the same horrid process, then I salute your dedication.
Why would they bother with her?
She is almost certainly batshit.
However her post is not the kind of rambling rant one normally finds on social media, and nor is Finchley Road mentioned.
I think the Lords might be unbiddable on this.