politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Amber warning: Rudd is safe – for now

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/alan_firth_/status/989876761851670529

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

AlastairMeeks said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, it's almost as if people are opposed to anti-Semitism because they can see where it leads.

https://twitter.com/AviMayer/status/988740215383740416

Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.

The difference being that non-Conservatives want to see some changes while Conservatives are a bit Albert And The Lion about this.

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I don't think he was expelled for anti-semitism.

So what was he expelled for?

He accused Smeeth of sharing information with a Telegraph journalist.

Is that accusation grounds for expulsion?

Probably. 'Bringing party into disrepute' could cover an awful lot, when a party wants it to.

I'd have thought the death knell for this guy is the claim the leaders office back him, and they say he has lied about that.

Roger said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

I'll add you to my reading list. Very well put

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

Roger said:

I've just looked up what I can find about the Wadsworth affair and cant't find anything beyond the rather theatrical walk-out by Ruth Smeeth.

I couldn't see that he did anything wrong and if Labour are going to genuflect to the Guido faction I think they ought to be stopped.

I've therefore just sent £10 to Wadsworth crowd funding appeal and hope this gets tested in court. If I wanted to support a party who paid no regard to natural justice I'd have joined the Tories

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the basis of the very general rule about doing something that brings the party into disreupte (at the time of the alleged breaches, there wasn't a specific rule on anti-semitism). Members who go around making extreme statements, attacking sitting MPs in personal terms and generally giving the Mail et al obnoxious stories are regarded as frankly more trouble than they're worth. Parties are voluntary organisations and nobody has an absolute right to be a member.

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

SquareRoot said:

kle4 said:

TGOHF said:

saddo said:

She's very safe in role. She's a firewall for May apart from anything else.

Secondly, Labour have directly called for her to resign. No way will May do what Labour ask her to do.

Thirdly Windrush is a zero visibility event outside the bubble.

I have to disagree. Even at best the goverment looks incompetent on a major issue.

I have to disagree. Its a lot of hot air emanating from the likes of the hypocrite Abbott and the questionable attitude of her leader. It'll be next months fish and chip paper.

Roger said:

I've just looked up what I can find about the Wadsworth affair and cant't find anything beyond the rather theatrical walk-out by Ruth Smeeth.

I couldn't see that he did anything wrong and if Labour are going to genuflect to the Guido faction I think they ought to be stopped.

I've therefore just sent £10 to Wadsworth crowd funding appeal and hope this gets tested in court. If I wanted to support a party who paid no regard to natural justice I'd have joined the Tories

Floater said:

SquareRoot said:

kle4 said:

TGOHF said:

saddo said:

She's very safe in role. She's a firewall for May apart from anything else.

Secondly, Labour have directly called for her to resign. No way will May do what Labour ask her to do.

Thirdly Windrush is a zero visibility event outside the bubble.

I have to disagree. Even at best the goverment looks incompetent on a major issue.

I have to disagree. Its a lot of hot air emanating from the likes of the hypocrite Abbott and the questionable attitude of her leader. It'll be next months fish and chip paper.

Ah yes, Abbott

Diane Abbott on Amber Rudd:

“Who can have confidence in Amber Rudd to make far-reaching changes to the Home Office if she doesn’t seem able to get basic facts right?”

I see irony isn't dead

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the basis of the very general rule about doing something that brings the party into disreupte (at the time of the alleged breaches, there wasn't a specific rule on anti-semitism). Members who go around making extreme statements, attacking sitting MPs in personal terms and generally giving the Mail et al obnoxious stories are regarded as frankly more trouble than they're worth. Parties are voluntary organisations and nobody has an absolute right to be a member.

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

JosiasJessop said:

You can always be polite and say something like: "My friend, you should not be sharing information with a Telegraph journalist." Apparently he did not.

Besides, Labour turned briefing of journalists - both by the government and backbenchers - into a fine art. It's a bit rich for Labour supporters such as Wadsworth to be complaining about it now ...

What he said didn't seem particularly impolite to me.
Unquestionably it has been damaging to the party though - and so i suppose arguably has brought it into disrepute. If he goes then you'd imagine Ken has no chance.

My cynicism has the opposite: Wadsworth may be used as a symbol (fairly or not) that the Labour leadership are doing something, and therefore when it comes to certain other cases, they can acquit and point to Wadsworth to show they are doing something.

I do think Ken is a litmus test. Although that particular stain should have been scrubbed years ago.

Roger said:

Tykejohnno said:

Recidivist said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Good article, though I could still see Amber Rudd going, and her mishandling of questions has probably killed her chances of the top job for good, assuming Conservative MPs have a memory.

The Windrush affair is very damaging for the Conservatives, not because they will immediately lose vote share (they won’t) but because groups that in due course they will need to make inroads with, younger voters and ethnic minority voters, will see this as a powerful piece of evidence that at best the Conservatives are reckless and at worst that they are actively racist. These groups were already alienated from the Conservatives by Brexit and every new reason that the Conservatives give them to despise them makes the long term task of gaining their votes that much harder.

If the Conservatives wish to terrify themselves, they should look at the voting splits in London among ethnic minority voters. Britain is getting less and less white, and that’s a trend that looks set to continue indefinitely. Demography is not destiny but the Conservatives seem to be doing their damnedest to make it so.

That's a good point on demography. The white working class is much less white than it used to be. It doesn't do that much work any more either.

Can I ask if you are a labour member ? If so,you should be ashamed of yourself with this post.

Everything wrong with this post if you support labour,going against the people labour should represent in the working class and change the white to black working class and you my friend could be in trouble.

First the Jews and now the white working class.

They'll be after the oligarchs next.....

kle4 said:

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

True. Like others I'm surprised she was not getting more personal blame on the last thread numbers. Her cocking up has increased the chances of public blame, but other reasons are keeping her on place.

Maybe one more negative revelation will be enough?
More of the same and though she looks bad, she might cling on. But the I didn't read it defence always feels a desperate move, true is not. Lord Coe has clung on with the same excuse.

Foxy said:

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the ember.

If giving obnoxious stories to the Tory press was grounds for expulsion, then surely a number of MPs are ripe for expulsion under the same rule? Not least Smeeth herself who did not contest Wadsworths accusation?

To me this increasingly is looking like factionalism, using expulsions/deselections as weapons.

Nigelb said:

kle4 said:

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

True. Like others I'm surprised she was not getting more personal blame on the last thread numbers. Her cocking up has increased the chances of public blame, but other reasons are keeping her on place.

Maybe one more negative revelation will be enough?
More of the same and though she looks bad, she might cling on. But the I didn't read it defence always feels a desperate move, true is not. Lord Coe has clung on with the same excuse.

It is surprising just how few blame Rudd, though entirely fair, as its very clear that any responsibility lies with May.
Rudd’s problem is her clear incompetence (I had thought she might be better than that) - but she seems unlikely now to pay the price for that, as doing so would expose May... and in any event clear incompetence is obviously no bar to cabinet office.

LordOfReason said:

Nigelb said:

kle4 said:

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

True. Like others I'm surprised she was not getting more personal blame on the last thread numbers. Her cocking up has increased the chances of public blame, but other reasons are keeping her on place.

Maybe one more negative revelation will be enough?
More of the same and though she looks bad, she might cling on. But the I didn't read it defence always feels a desperate move, true is not. Lord Coe has clung on with the same excuse.

Hang on! What clear incompetence? Stop going with the herd you nerd. All this Amber bashing for being incompetent is clearly missing the point of the real cause of all her pain? Does Britain currently have an immigration policy or not? Is the policy working? Does that policy include targets for removing illegal immigrants or not?
I think she is saying the right thing in wanting Home Office to focus on individual cases, rather than driven by targets. I think she is right, if that was Home Office approach for last 21 years we wouldn’t have a Windrush Scandal. if she is being bashed for incompetence failing to maintain pretence of a muddled policy, she inherited and asked to continue, that’s unfair. Unfair of you, who is doing that. Take a good look at yourselves, what policy are you actually defending with these attacks on the lady?

geoffw said:

Is it possible to bring the Labour Party into disrepute?

kle4 said:

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the basis of the very general rule about doing something that brings the party into disreupte (at the time of the alleged breaches, there wasn't a specific rule on anti-semitism). Members who go around making extreme statements, attacking sitting MPs in personal terms and generally giving the Mail et al obnoxious stories are regarded as frankly more trouble than they're worth. Parties are voluntary organisations and nobody has an absolute right to be a member.

Seems reasonable. Some people probably get kicked to the curb a bit harshly by parties, it's a rough old game after all, but for the sake of the party it could have looked bad if he hadn't been expelled. And of course perhaps those who have seen all the details made the right call regardless of the politics of it.

Nonsense. Not even remotely reasonable. The party is facing eruption in the media that it is anti Semitic, one of the least racist members in the party is thrown into the volcano. Why would anyone want to join and voluntarily work hard for a party who is going to do that to you?

The real problem as Herdson explains in the header is the political incompetence of the leaders at the top and the teams they have built around them.

“You are being painted as racists, how are you going to rebut this?”
Shrug. “I’m not remotely racist, I don’t need to do anything to rebut this nonsense.”

Ishmael_Z said:

Recidivist said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, it's almost as if people are opposed to anti-Semitism because they can see where it leads.

https://twitter.com/AviMayer/status/988740215383740416

Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.

We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.

No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.

Floater said:

This is the sort of company Corbyn keeps

http://hurryupharry.org/2018/04/27/corbyn-attended-tiny-rally-in-his-constituency-with-antisemitism-on-display/

Recidivist said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Recidivist said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, it's almost as if people are opposed to anti-Semitism because they can see where it leads.

https://twitter.com/AviMayer/status/988740215383740416

Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.

We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.

No we aren't. I know I am. I don't know if you are, but I know that many people in your party aren't (and I know that because Corbyn has admitted it), so you might very well not be. I also know I am not using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage, because I was exactly as appalled by the antics of Aidan Burley as I am by those of your fellow party members. It may become legitimate in a couple of years time for you to complain that people keep harping on about Labour's former antisemitism problem, but there ain't nothing former about it at the moment. So suck it up, deal with it and stop whining.

Labour isn't my party. I've just spotted that this whole anti-semitism thing is being orchestrated by their enemies.

Roger said:

Talking of giving offence I read this piece in the Telegraph yesterday by Frank Skinner

".........We’re living in the age of new Puritanism. To paraphrase Descartes: I’m offended, therefore I am.

At a show the other day, I decided to talk to an audience member in the front row who was in a wheelchair, I asked her, ‘So what sort of speed can you get?’ and some other woman shouted out, ‘You’re identifying her by her disability!’

I said, ‘that’s the reason why most comedians don’t talk to people in wheelchairs; in case someone like you yells at them’.

Then I turned to the woman in the wheelchair and said, ‘I won’t be speaking to you again, you’re trouble'. Then I addressed the audience saying, ‘I don’t know who to talk to next’ and this middle-aged woman pipes up, ‘I’m a lesbian, if that helps?’"

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno. But the first gets the outrage on this forum.

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the ember.

If giving obnoxious stories to the Tory press was grounds for expulsion, then surely a number of MPs are ripe for expulsion under the same rule? Not least Smeeth herself who did not contest Wadsworths accusation?

To me this increasingly is looking like factionalism, using expulsions/deselections as weapons.

You seem more outraged than many actual labour members.

Frankly, I'd imagine many mps are technically guilty of bringing parties into disrepute . But disciplining mps like that causes more problems than it solves for a party. Sacrificing a pawn, however, does not. He can rest easy that his expulsion may help the party .

Edit: of course, they may genuinely think he did wrong, I don't mean to imply only politics will have been at play

CarlottaVance said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/foodies-fired-up-over-pizza-with-pineapple-w9pxlwdw6

I am reminded of an Italian colleagues' contemptuous dismissal of British pizza - 'That's not pizza - that's round food'.....

LordOfReason said:

Nigelb said:

kle4 said:

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

True. Like others I'm surprised she was not getting more personal blame on the last thread numbers. Her cocking up has increased the chances of public blame, but other reasons are keeping her on place.

Maybe one more negative revelation will be enough?
More of the same and though she looks bad, she might cling on. But the I didn't read it defence always feels a desperate move, true is not. Lord Coe has clung on with the same excuse.

It is surprising just how few blame Rudd, though entirely fair, as its very clear that any responsibility lies with May.
Rudd’s problem is her clear incompetence (I had thought she might be better than that) - but she seems unlikely now to pay the price for that, as doing so would expose May... and in any event clear incompetence is obviously no bar to cabinet office.

Hang on! What clear incompetence? Stop going with the herd you nerd. All this Amber bashing for being incompetent is clearly missing the point of the real cause of all her pain? Does Britain currently have an immigration policy or not? Is the policy working? Does that policy include targets for removing illegal immigrants or not?
I think she is saying the right thing in wanting Home Office to focus on individual cases, rather than driven by targets. I think she is right, if that was Home Office approach for last 21 years we wouldn’t have a Windrush Scandal. if she is being bashed for incompetence failing to maintain pretence of a muddled policy, she inherited and asked to continue, that’s unfair. Unfair of you, who is doing that. Take a good look at yourselves, what policy are you actually defending with these attacks on the lady?

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/WikiGuido/status/990173469936685057

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/foodies-fired-up-over-pizza-with-pineapple-w9pxlwdw6

I am reminded of an Italian colleagues' contemptuous dismissal of British pizza - 'That's not pizza - that's round food'.....

Hawaiian pizza fans are most likely to be young, female and slightly right-wing. Their hobbies include watching films, reading non-fiction and spending time with their partner. Melania Trump was spotted carrying a carefully wrapped Hawaiian pizza into the White House and once told the Pope that she fed it to her husband.

Retail workers, fashion designers and translators rank top in the professions most likely to order the increasingly popular dish. YouGov found that 84 per cent of Britons liked pizza and 82 per cent liked pineapple but only 53 per cent said they liked the two together.

JosiasJessop said:

Recidivist said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Recidivist, it's almost as if people are opposed to anti-Semitism because they can see where it leads.

https://twitter.com/AviMayer/status/988740215383740416

Edited extra bit: you're also neglecting that everyone I've seen here, from all sides, has condemned the Windrush scandal.

We're all opposed to anti-semitism. In my opinion the people who are using accusations of anti-semitism for party advantage are the ones who need to look at themselves in the mirror.

"We're all opposed to anti-semitism."

No. The problem is people like to think they're opposed to anti-semitism, whilst the reality is somewhat different and nuanced.

Corbyn's found himself in difficulties because he's a deeply ideological person. One strand of that ideology is to help those who are less fortunate than ourselves, and because ethnic minorities are often less fortunate, anti-racism is part of that ideology.

But when it comes to Judaism, we have an ethnic grouping who are not, in general, less fortunate than ourselves. As a whole, they have done quite well for themselves - and good on them. Because of this, they cannot be part of the oppressed, and therefore must be oppressors - and you're not being racist, you're attacking the oppressors. This is, naturally enough, accentuated by the situation in the Middle East.

It's barmy and stupid, but backed up by some of the sh*t being written by so-called Labour supporters on t'Internet.

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

rottenborough said:

BannedInParis said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/WikiGuido/status/990173469936685057

In the words of someone better, is this wise?

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/990175057585557504

Catching up after a few days away, and people are *still* talking about this?

What’s going to happen when they expel Ken? Or don’t expel Ken?

It's opp-topic, but you might like to know that Blue Origin will be launching their suborbital rocket tomorrow evening, and will be livestreaming it.

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Sean_F said:

daodao said:

FF43 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Unfair if she does. The tone had been set by May who clearly looks the nastier piece of work at the moment. Malevolence is always less attractive than mere incompetence.

I'm bemused by your witch-sniffer general capability of detecting nastiness in the Conservatives, but utterly missing it when it occurs in the Labour party. It's quite a skill...

One seems to be about party activists censuring representatives for attending particular meetings. The other is about throwing ordinary people out of their jobs, denying them lifesaving health treatment and exiling them to countries they don't know so politicians can meet a target.

I dunno..

+1.

If Marc Wadsworth, a veteran anti-racist campaigner, is an anti-semite, how come his lawyer (Harriet Wistrich) is Jewish? There appears to be a witch hunt against people on the left, such as the distinguished film-maker Ken Loach, who campaign against injustice.

TM, in the use of the phrase "citizens of nowhere", revealed herself as a nasty person in her attitude to alien minorities.

The problem with Ken Loach (and those with similar views) is that their pursuit for justice for groups which they favour leads them to support injustice towards groups they dislike.

While not a party to the evidence against Wadsworth, there doesn't seem to be anything in the public domain by him that is anti Semetic. If there is anything, then I would be interested to see it.

Loach is a different kettle of fish perhaps.

I've not followed the story closely either, but I understand that Wadsworth was expelled on the basis of the very general rule about doing something that brings the party into disreupte (at the time of the alleged breaches, there wasn't a specific rule on anti-semitism). Members who go around making extreme statements, attacking sitting MPs in personal terms and generally giving the Mail et al obnoxious stories are regarded as frankly more trouble than they're worth. Parties are voluntary organisations and nobody has an absolute right to be a member.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Borough, the incompetence of Fox is having a seriously detrimental affect upon the national interest.

Scott_P said:

SandyRentool said:

My fellow PBers, with all of this talk of antisemitism and Windrush we are losing sight of what really matters.

https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/990169166639493121

https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/857873143557492736

OldKingCole said:

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/foodies-fired-up-over-pizza-with-pineapple-w9pxlwdw6

I am reminded of an Italian colleagues' contemptuous dismissal of British pizza - 'That's not pizza - that's round food'.....

Hawaiian pizza fans are most likely to be young, female and slightly right-wing. Their hobbies include watching films, reading non-fiction and spending time with their partner. Melania Trump was spotted carrying a carefully wrapped Hawaiian pizza into the White House and once told the Pope that she fed it to her husband.

Retail workers, fashion designers and translators rank top in the professions most likely to order the increasingly popular dish. YouGov found that 84 per cent of Britons liked pizza and 82 per cent liked pineapple but only 53 per cent said they liked the two together.

Best pizza we ever had was in Slovenia some years ago.

Been to Hawaii, but never felt tempted to order pizza there.

LordOfReason said:

Nigelb said:

kle4 said:

Torby_Fennel said:

In my opinion politicians of all parties shout "Resign" at their opponents rather too frequently these days and usually without good reason. There's a big difference between the false outrage of politicians and the genuine outrage of the public and if the public are not outraged (beyond party lines) then the false outrage of politicians carries little weight. It's not at all clear to me that Amber Rudd has crossed the line into outraging the general public... yet...

True. Like others I'm surprised she was not getting more personal blame on the last thread numbers. Her cocking up has increased the chances of public blame, but other reasons are keeping her on place.

Maybe one more negative revelation will be enough?
More of the same and though she looks bad, she might cling on. But the I didn't read it defence always feels a desperate move, true is not. Lord Coe has clung on with the same excuse.

It is surprising just how few blame Rudd, though entirely fair, as its very clear that any responsibility lies with May.
Rudd’s problem is her clear incompetence (I had thought she might be better than that) - but she seems unlikely now to pay the price for that, as doing so would expose May... and in any event clear incompetence is obviously no bar to cabinet office.

Hang on! What clear incompetence? Stop going with the herd you nerd. All this Amber bashing for being incompetent is clearly missing the point of the real cause of all her pain? Does Britain currently have an immigration policy or not? Is the policy working? Does that policy include targets for removing illegal immigrants or not?
I think she is saying the right thing in wanting Home Office to focus on individual cases, rather than driven by targets. I think she is right, if that was Home Office approach for last 21 years we wouldn’t have a Windrush Scandal. if she is being bashed for incompetence failing to maintain pretence of a muddled policy, she inherited and asked to continue, that’s unfair. Unfair of you, who is doing that. Take a good look at yourselves, what policy are you actually defending with these attacks on the lady?

rottenborough said:

CBI not holding back anymore. Serious doubts on Fox:

"Britain's leading business group has "serious doubts" that the UK government will be able to fulfil its promise to roll-over Britain's 40 existing free trade deals with non-EU countries in time for Brexit, telling Business Insider that failure to do so could "wipe out" entire sectors of the economy.

UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox has promised to roll-over Britain's existing deals with non-EU countries, as part of its EU membership, the "second after" Brexit.

However, the Confederation of British Industry has told BI that this is very unlikely to be possible, potentially leaving entire sectors of the economy on a "cliff-edge" after Brexit."

http://uk.businessinsider.com/cbi-warns-liam-foxs-trade-dealrollover-plan-risks-a-cliff-edge-brexit-2018-4

Sean_F said:

rottenborough said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Borough, the incompetence of Fox is having a seriously detrimental affect upon the national interest.

I'm starting to think that the Tories may be absolutely slaughtered at GE 2022.

If Labour had a decent leadership team, that might well be the case.