Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review : June 14th 2018

245

Comments

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Just digging out blasts from the past. Philip Davies, a man for whom the mendacious or moron test clearly points directly to mendacious

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/dec/18/philip-davies-political-correctness-campaign

    "why it is so offensive to black up your face, as I have never understood this".
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    To be honest we're not entirely united in the Lib Dems. We're pretty much almost all agree that Brexit is a really terrible thing for the country but we have differences of opinion upon what to do about it. Some want to re-run the In/Out referendum, some (most?) want a referendum on the Brexit deal and others want to just try to find ways to minimize the harm as we leave.

    UKIP have only gone back to the position in 2009 and we are still there waiting in reserve, no Brexit or a major sell out and we'll be back.

    If there is a full Brexit, UKIP will probably have to re-brand as a centre-right populist libertarian party an alternative to the Conservative party and some elements of the old Labour party.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,592
    RobD said:

    She'd have to start whipping private members bills first.
    She'd also need to have 2 spare votes she no longer needs in parliament...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,567
    Agree with others about this Chope business - proper scrutiny of legislation is an important principle, but his reported track record does raise questions.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356

    Quite
    At least in this case it has the government's support, so it'll probably be on the statute books before too long.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,180
    Alistair said:

    Just digging out blasts from the past. Philip Davies, a man for whom the mendacious or moron test clearly points directly to mendacious

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/dec/18/philip-davies-political-correctness-campaign

    "why it is so offensive to black up your face, as I have never understood this".

    Looks like a pretty good attempt at riding both of those horses simultaneously to me.
  • I am going to guess Morocco vs Iran isn't exactly a great game?

    If you could manufacture it in tablet form, Switzerland would be plunged into recession...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,043
    DeClare said:

    UKIP have only gone back to the position in 2009 and we are still there waiting in reserve, no Brexit or a major sell out and we'll be back.

    If there is a full Brexit, UKIP will probably have to re-brand as a centre-right populist libertarian party an alternative to the Conservative party and some elements of the old Labour party.
    Both the UK Libertarian Party and the far right 'For Britain' Party stood against UKIP in the Lewisham East by election so they have competition whichever way they turn post Brexit
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DeClare said:

    UKIP have only gone back to the position in 2009 and we are still there waiting in reserve, no Brexit or a major sell out and we'll be back.

    If there is a full Brexit, UKIP will probably have to re-brand as a centre-right populist libertarian party an alternative to the Conservative party and some elements of the old Labour party.
    If there is a full Brexit (and probably even if there is not), UKIP will probably have to disband.

    UKIP have as much of a pulse as John Cleese's parrot.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,180
    England's women cricketers finish off the innings with a hat trick. One way of keeping scoring down in the final over.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    LOL. That escalated quickly; no need to get angry just because you can't understand the point I made. Several times.
    I'm not angry, nor have you made a point.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,385
    DavidL said:

    Trump puts 25% tariff on Chinese goods: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44498484

    If that doesn't encourage the onshoring of some US production I am not sure what would.

    The traditional view is that this is reckless and damaging to international growth and trade but the fact is that the current system has not worked well for the US (or the UK) for more than 20 years now. The growth that is generated is not shared around and neither is the increase in living standards.

    A great deal of that is the US's own fault (ours as well) because we don't save enough, we consume too much and we are too prone to electing irresponsible governments who run large deficits. But long term the consequences are seriously adverse. Too much of our future earnings actually belong to people outside this country. Improving the standard of living of those resident in the US or the UK becomes increasingly difficult, as does maintaining public services. Bluntly, the US and the UK really cannot go on like this. Trump is a bull in a china shop but it is difficult to pretend (as I expect the BBC to do) that the current system of trade does not need shaken up.

    I respectfully disagree with you.

    The UK and the US run unbalanced trade because of our domestic policies. Applying tariffs to Chinese goods, while not changing the underlying cause, i.e. insufficient saving, will not improve things*. All it will do, in all likelihood, is encourage tit-for-tat tariffs from China or the EU.

    Tit-for-tat tariffs will slow the world economy down, generally. There won't be winners and losers, everybody will be a loser. Given that the headwinds in the developed world - such as demographics - are secular in nature, and not going away, this is extremely bad news for the world.

    * Technically, of course, tariffs raise the price of goods (and spending) relative to saving, and therefore will increase the savings rate.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,385
    Damn it. I was going to get my UK Economy video out next week, but now I think I might have to do another one on tariffs and trade.

    (Sell Boeing.)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,385
    DavidL said:

    Yep. Of course having a record federal deficit artificially increasing already high domestic demand is not exactly a policy to reduce the trade deficit. Like us, if the US ran a reasonable surplus in the public accounts most of the deficit would disappear.
    Spot on: as I said in my video, the US's expansionary budget makes it practically impossible to run a trade surplus. It's pushing on a stick in two opposite directions and wondering why it doesn't move.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038

    If there is a full Brexit (and probably even if there is not), UKIP will probably have to disband.

    UKIP have as much of a pulse as John Cleese's parrot.
    If the EU plans to offer us an extension of A50, to resolve our chaos, there'll be a new intake of UKIP MEPs. Will that give it a new lease of life? It certainly helps Farage's personal (lack of) money problem.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,180
    edited June 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    I respectfully disagree with you.

    The UK and the US run unbalanced trade because of our domestic policies. Applying tariffs to Chinese goods, while not changing the underlying cause, i.e. insufficient saving, will not improve things*. All it will do, in all likelihood, is encourage tit-for-tat tariffs from China or the EU.

    Tit-for-tat tariffs will slow the world economy down, generally. There won't be winners and losers, everybody will be a loser. Given that the headwinds in the developed world - such as demographics - are secular in nature, and not going away, this is extremely bad news for the world.

    * Technically, of course, tariffs raise the price of goods (and spending) relative to saving, and therefore will increase the savings rate.
    I have acknowledged that the main cause of both the US and trade deficits are our own domestic policies. We are not in disagreement about that. But other policies such as artificially low exchange rates, IP theft, tax advantages for off shoring and NTBs have all played their part as well. And we are, largely but not exclusively as a result of our own stupidity, impoverishing ourselves with our self-indulgence.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,502

    FPT @tkpfar, (related to mass migration)

    I'd have thought the CSU would outpoll the CDU in Bavaria, if the two went head to head. The former is very much the successor to the Bavarian Peoples' Party, which dominated State politics, prior to 1933.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,180
    rcs1000 said:

    Damn it. I was going to get my UK Economy video out next week, but now I think I might have to do another one on tariffs and trade.

    (Sell Boeing.)

    Really enjoying your videos by the way. Sent the one on Italy to my Euro-devil. I'll make him a eurosceptic yet (actually not that hard).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,385
    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,839

    If there is a full Brexit (and probably even if there is not), UKIP will probably have to disband.

    UKIP have as much of a pulse as John Cleese's parrot.
    I think an alternative scenario for kicking Brexit into the long grass is starting to open up.

    If Article 50 is extended so that we take part in the 2019 European elections, they would become a de facto second referendum without there being a referendum. You could see UKIP MEPs losing their seats on GE turnout levels.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    dixiedean said:

    Actually not bad. At least they are giving it a go. If they don't win this they have no chance of going through with Spai and Portugal to come.
    Better than the dross from Uruguay Egypt.
    I take that back. second half has been atrocious.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,180
    rcs1000 said:

    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?

    Is it really a rhetorical question if you answer it? /pedent.

    The answer, subject to distortion by grants and tax incentives must be yes. Lucky for the rust belt that they comprise the largest clump of marginal states in the country. It incentivises the politicians wonderfully.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    dixiedean said:

    I take that back. second half has been atrocious.
    Cue for a goal obvs.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,491
    edited June 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?

    Also, internet connectivity / speeds are really crap. For any business, in any sector, this is massive hindrance in the modern world.

    Additional, good US colleges. They aren't in the rust belt. So your engineer grads will have to choose to relocate to a part of the US that isn't very attractive.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    I think an alternative scenario for kicking Brexit into the long grass is starting to open up.

    If Article 50 is extended so that we take part in the 2019 European elections, they would become a de facto second referendum without there being a referendum. You could see UKIP MEPs losing their seats on GE turnout levels.

    "the 2019 European elections ... would become a de facto second referendum"


    LOL. Nice try.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,043
    edited June 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?

    For the rustbelt, which saw the biggest Trump vote, read the West Midlands here, which saw the biggest Leave vote, or indeed the Pas de Calais and industrial North of France which saw the biggest Le Pen vote
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    rcs1000 said:

    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?

    How does Kentucky have better infrastructure than Michigan or Ohio, which are right on the Great Lakes (and thus have access to both the St Lawrence and the Erie Canal?

    I guess a traditional reason would be they have an experienced manufacturing workforce in the rustbelt, but people migrate around the US for work, so that doesn't matter. Freedom of movement has a huge tendency to exacerbate cycles of decline. I don't know why economists rate it so much. I guess they are applying intellectual models that don't take into account political economy.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    rcs1000 said:

    Imagine if there was a four month extension to Article 50. Would we have EU elections? Or could it be fudged in some way?
    I believe that the legislation reallocating the UK's seats in the European Parliament to other countries is written so that it comes into effect on Brexit day whenever that is. So if Brexit has not happened by the time of the next elections the UK must participate.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Also, internet connectivity / speeds are really crap. For any business, in any sector, this is massive hindrance in the modern world.

    Additional, good US colleges. They aren't in the rust belt. So your engineer grads will have to choose to relocate to a part of the US that isn't very attractive.
    Several rustbelt states, including MI, have right-to-work laws, and as for good schools, UMich, Penn State, UIUC, Northwestern, Case Western, UChicago, Carnegie Mellon, Marquette. Need I add more?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    I think an alternative scenario for kicking Brexit into the long grass is starting to open up.

    If Article 50 is extended so that we take part in the 2019 European elections, they would become a de facto second referendum without there being a referendum. You could see UKIP MEPs losing their seats on GE turnout levels.
    Yes but in 2014 UKIP were the only pro-Leave party, based on 2016 manifestos both the Tories and Labour are pro-Leave too. In which case one suspect at least 75% will go for pro-Leave parties.

    Sorry william.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    edited June 2018

    If there is a full Brexit (and probably even if there is not), UKIP will probably have to disband.

    UKIP have as much of a pulse as John Cleese's parrot.
    I am not sure why they would need to disband - which isn't quite the same as saying they would be an effective force.

    The continuing SDP and Liberal parties still exist legally and even have a few councillors.

    www.sdp.org.uk

    www.liberal.org.uk


    And of course you never know what might be round the corner. I doubt many in May 2015 would have predicted what has happened since.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    brendan16 said:

    I am not sure why they would need to disband - which isn't quite the same as saying they would be an effective force.

    The continuing SDP and Liberal parties still exist legally and even have a few councillors.

    www.sdp.org.uk

    www.liberal.org.uk


    And of course you never know what might be round the corner. I doubt many in May 2015 would have predicted what has happened since.
    I may be wrong but it's my understanding that UKIP have ran up a lot of debt and are struggling to raise funds now. Continuing a name only doesn't cost too much, paying off debts does if they are fiscally as well as intellectually bankrupt.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    rcs1000 said:

    I respectfully disagree with you.

    The UK and the US run unbalanced trade because of our domestic policies. Applying tariffs to Chinese goods, while not changing the underlying cause, i.e. insufficient saving, will not improve things*. All it will do, in all likelihood, is encourage tit-for-tat tariffs from China or the EU.

    Tit-for-tat tariffs will slow the world economy down, generally. There won't be winners and losers, everybody will be a loser. Given that the headwinds in the developed world - such as demographics - are secular in nature, and not going away, this is extremely bad news for the world.

    * Technically, of course, tariffs raise the price of goods (and spending) relative to saving, and therefore will increase the savings rate.
    It takes two to tango. The large surplus countries cough China cough are as much a part of the problem. So too is Germany in its way even if it wasn't entirely planned.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,543
    Sean_F said:
    Suggestion for possible trolling of Chopper:

    1) Get camera with massive telescopic lens;

    2) zoom to its maximum magnification;

    3) Hold it within an inch of his crotch;

    4) Ask a friend very loudly whether this procedure will enable you to see his penis on the resulting image;

    5) make sure said friend has been primed with the answer, 'no, his wife told me you need the Hubble telescope.'
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,356
    ydoethur said:

    Suggestion for possible trolling of Chopper:

    1) Get camera with massive telescopic lens;

    2) zoom to its maximum magnification;

    3) Hold it within an inch of his crotch;

    4) Ask a friend very loudly whether this procedure will enable you to see his penis on the resulting image;

    5) make sure said friend has been primed with the answer, 'no, his wife told me you need the Hubble telescope.'
    The Hubble telescope would make for an awful microscope.... :p
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,296

    I think an alternative scenario for kicking Brexit into the long grass is starting to open up.

    If Article 50 is extended so that we take part in the 2019 European elections, they would become a de facto second referendum without there being a referendum. You could see UKIP MEPs losing their seats on GE turnout levels.
    The problem with that is that a further round of European elections could re-invigorate UKIP (sadly).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,543
    He is of course right that lots of parliamentary bills are badly worded and shouldn't be on the statute book for that reason, and or need more scrutiny.

    His argument would have more force by far if it wasn't mostly government bills that DID have parliamentary scrutiny that suffer from this flaw.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,543
    RobD said:

    The Hubble telescope would make for an awful microscope.... :p
    I was thinking more of general principles - you need something very big to see something that small!
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    RobD said:

    She'd have to start whipping private members bills first.
    Whipping private members might be more effective.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,543

    Whipping private members might be more effective.
    Well, if somebody threatened to whip my private member I would certainly be putty in their hands...
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited June 2018

    It takes two to tango. The large surplus countries cough China cough are as much a part of the problem. So too is Germany in its way even if it wasn't entirely planned.
    Quality of goods or , more precisely, the price/quality ratio also matters. If you sell crap either there will be no takers or takers will not pay much.

    Most US goods, apart from Military [ sold on credit to governments ] or agricultural , are crap.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,296
    ydoethur said:

    He is of course right that lots of parliamentary bills are badly worded and shouldn't be on the statute book for that reason, and or need more scrutiny.

    His argument would have more force by far if it wasn't mostly government bills that DID have parliamentary scrutiny that suffer from this flaw.

    If his wikipedia entry is to be believed he sounds like an odious shite. To think there are current MPs with this set of views, even in the Conservative Party, is astonishing!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309

    Yes, this is an old story - lots of harmless private Bills were blocked by Chope and another notorious MP with childish glee - they said they believed there was too much legislation and anything important should be done in Government time. The same other MP (who lots here will know, but his name escapes me) used to boast that he would throw away letters from constituents if they related to local problems ("What do I care if their drains don't work?"). He was often cited as a great parliamentarian, which he was in a very specialised and peculiarly unhelpful way.
    Eric Forth.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    DavidL said:

    And on another front I expect the rows around this policy to take up a lot more time than Brexit at the June summit: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-44494006

    The Franco-German alliance is becoming strained with the lack of enthusiasm in Germany for Macron's plans and the French are starting to look around for new allies whether the Germans like the proposals or not.

    Interesting times and all that.

    An emerging theme in the EU at the moment is various member states (particularly in the eurozone) starting to coalesce to oppose Germany.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,029

    If his wikipedia entry is to be believed he sounds like an odious shite. To think there are current MPs with this set of views, even in the Conservative Party, is astonishing!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope
    I am utterly disgusted with Chope and I concur he is an odious member of our party. Please do not judge us all on his unacceptable behaviour
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    rcs1000 said:

    Imagine if there was a four month extension to Article 50. Would we have EU elections? Or could it be fudged in some way?
    If we do have EU elections next year then I’d expect it to give a turboboost to UKIP.

    I’d instinctively vote for them just to give the Government a message about backsliding, and I suspect I wouldn’t be alone. That could start to fracture Theresa’s coalition at a Westminster level at well, and even if just 3-4% peeled away back to UKIP subsequently it would be enough to put Labour in the lead.

    Therefore, I don’t expect it to happen.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    ydoethur said:

    Well, if somebody threatened to whip my private member I would certainly be putty in their hands...
    If Theresa wants to get her mojo back she ought to consider chopping them off.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    I may be wrong but it's my understanding that UKIP have ran up a lot of debt and are struggling to raise funds now. Continuing a name only doesn't cost too much, paying off debts does if they are fiscally as well as intellectually bankrupt.
    You are wrong, the debts were paid off at Easter after a special appeal by Gerard Batten in March.

    UKIP have downsized by cutting staff and are now in good financial shape, we have stopped losing members and the party conference will take place at the ICC in Birmingham in September.

    Political opponents might wish UKIP will go away, but it's not happening, last night David Kurten got around the same percentage as UKIP got in recent General Elections, except 2015, in a very difficult constituency.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    DavidL said:

    Looks like a pretty good attempt at riding both of those horses simultaneously to me.
    It depends why.

    At a private fancy dress party, or a satirical comedy, I wouldn’t see any problem with this.

    But, i wouldn’t advise it: it’s risky to be seen to do and say many taboo things in the social media age as they can be recorded and shown to an audience well behind your control.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309

    I'm not angry, nor have you made a point.
    His point was to try and use it to have a dig at Brexit and Brexiteers.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    rcs1000 said:

    Spot on: as I said in my video, the US's expansionary budget makes it practically impossible to run a trade surplus. It's pushing on a stick in two opposite directions and wondering why it doesn't move.
    Air France 447.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,255
    ydoethur said:

    He is of course right that lots of parliamentary bills are badly worded and shouldn't be on the statute book for that reason, and or need more scrutiny.

    His argument would have more force by far if it wasn't mostly government bills that DID have parliamentary scrutiny that suffer from this flaw.

    Moreover I assume that a Private Members Bill has to go through the same process as any other bill with votes in the Lords and committee stages. So if the objection is that the bill won't be properly scrutinised that seems utterly ridiculous.


    I am all for slashing laws and reducing the amount of legislation but I am sure there are literally hundreds of laws we could remove from the statute book rather than sabotaging bills that are meant to protect women.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,839

    An emerging theme in the EU at the moment is various member states (particularly in the eurozone) starting to coalesce to oppose Germany.
    This sounds very much in line with Merkel's position:

    Conte said that the "concept of country of first arrival needs to be reconsidered".

    "When someone sets foot in Italy, they set foot in Europe", he said.


    Also note that rhetoric and reality are not aligned:
    https://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1007497531528499200
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    rcs1000 said:

    Re the rust belt:

    Can I ask a rhetorical question?

    I can? Yes!

    If you were starting a US light manufacturing business, and wanted to build a factory, why would you choose the rust belt?

    The local states are in serious money trouble, and therefore taxes are high, and services poor, while the unions are strong. The infrastructure for getting goods out, if you're an exporter isn't that great either.

    Wouldn't you rather be in a "right to work" state (i.e. no closed shop), with low taxes, and much better access to export infrastructure?

    Since 1994 (the creation of NAFTA), three G8 countries (I'm including Russia here), have increased automobile production: Germany, the US and the UK. Everyone else has seen volumes fall.

    The US, though, has seen automobile manufacturing flee the Great Lakes area and head for Kentucky, South Carolina and the like. Even if you in shore manufacturing, won't it be more likely to go to these places?

    I’m amazed they still have the closed shop in parts of the USA.

    On the other hand, far too many Americans still seem to see state/federal public spending on infrastructure as akin to communism, so their infrastructure is often appalling.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,296

    I am utterly disgusted with Chope and I concur he is an odious member of our party. Please do not judge us all on his unacceptable behaviour
    I don't Big_G.

    You and pretty much all the PB Tories seem like reasonable decent, people to me, sincere in what you believe in (even if you are a bit misguided at times :wink:). But this guy seems to be a 'nasty party' dinosaur of the first degree. Hard to believe your party doesn't have a way of weeding such MPs out.

    Deselect Soubry, Woolaston, or Greive? - Get rid of this guy first, would be my advice!
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,033
    DeClare said:

    You are wrong, the debts were paid off at Easter after a special appeal by Gerard Batten in March.

    UKIP have downsized by cutting staff and are now in good financial shape, we have stopped losing members and the party conference will take place at the ICC in Birmingham in September.

    Political opponents might wish UKIP will go away, but it's not happening, last night David Kurten got around the same percentage as UKIP got in recent General Elections, except 2015, in a very difficult constituency.
    Greens overtake UKIP
    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1005113528989241344?lang=en-gb
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094
    That's your Tories for you , cretins and sleazebags
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094
    DeClare said:

    I drew Iran in my pub sweepstake, they were the first team to qualify, apart from Russia of course.

    Just for fun I also put £1 on them at 1000/1 which I'll lay off if they get to the quarter finals.
    LOL
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DeClare said:

    You are wrong, the debts were paid off at Easter after a special appeal by Gerard Batten in March.

    UKIP have downsized by cutting staff and are now in good financial shape, we have stopped losing members and the party conference will take place at the ICC in Birmingham in September.

    Political opponents might wish UKIP will go away, but it's not happening, last night David Kurten got around the same percentage as UKIP got in recent General Elections, except 2015, in a very difficult constituency.

    My mistake. No reason then that going forwards UKIP can't enjoy as much success as the continuity SDP or Liberal parties do today.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309

    I don't Big_G.

    You and pretty much all the PB Tories seem like reasonable decent, people to me, sincere in what you believe in (even if you are a bit misguided at times :wink:). But this guy seems to be a 'nasty party' dinosaur of the first degree. Hard to believe your party doesn't have a way of weeding such MPs out.

    Deselect Soubry, Woolaston, or Greive? - Get rid of this guy first, would be my advice!
    Why should he be deselected?

    I don’t agree with him on this, but he represents a strand of socially conservative Thatcherite thinking that is deserving of representation at Westminster.

    A better reponse would be to reform the rules for the review and passage of private members bills.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    malcolmg said:

    LOL
    Could do with a draw in this game, puts Iran on top of the group! if they should find a way to qualify, they could beat Uruguay in the next round, they have a tremendous defensive record.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038

    I don't Big_G.

    You and pretty much all the PB Tories seem like reasonable decent, people to me, sincere in what you believe in (even if you are a bit misguided at times :wink:). But this guy seems to be a 'nasty party' dinosaur of the first degree. Hard to believe your party doesn't have a way of weeding such MPs out.

    Deselect Soubry, Woolaston, or Greive? - Get rid of this guy first, would be my advice!
    I think the problem goes further than just one. Ken Clarke said '40-50 MPs' are 'the hard right'. If so, they should be in a different party. In a chamber with PR, they probably *would* constitute a group with its own name, e.g. the Freedom Party.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,080

    I am utterly disgusted with Chope and I concur he is an odious member of our party. Please do not judge us all on his unacceptable behaviour
    We don't! And thanks for being so candid!
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    @CasinoRoyale

    Quite. The prospect of voting for representatives to an organisation we voted to leave three years before is frankly surreal, and would be the most visible in your face message that our politicians just don’t get it. It’s therefore more of a hard stop to any short term extension ( even though that would be a disgrace for all the same reasons). It would also be bizzare from an EU point of view to organise elections and have 70 odd (?) members sat there for an indeterminate amount of time, before they then had to decide whether they were or weren’t reallocating according to their orginal plans? Farce; nobody would be sure of the rules they were voting under accross 27 countries.

    Oh, and Chope. What an idiot. Inexcusable.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,029

    I don't Big_G.

    You and pretty much all the PB Tories seem like reasonable decent, people to me, sincere in what you believe in (even if you are a bit misguided at times :wink:). But this guy seems to be a 'nasty party' dinosaur of the first degree. Hard to believe your party doesn't have a way of weeding such MPs out.

    Deselect Soubry, Woolaston, or Greive? - Get rid of this guy first, would be my advice!
    They are in all parties and if I was his constituent chairman he would be in front of me tomorrow
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,029
    malcolmg said:

    That's your Tories for you , cretins and sleazebags
    They are in all parties Malc, sadly
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867



    If his wikipedia entry is to be believed he sounds like an odious shite. To think there are current MPs with this set of views, even in the Conservative Party, is astonishing!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Chope


    Good grief, what an awful person!

    Trouble is with a majority of over 25,000 in his seat he has a job for life and can basically do whatever the hell he wants without being answerable to anyone.

    Situations like this really are the best advertisement for voting reform that you can come up with....
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,033

    Why should he be deselected?

    I don’t agree with him on this, but he represents a strand of socially conservative Thatcherite thinking that is deserving of representation at Westminster.

    A better reponse would be to reform the rules for the review and passage of private members bills.
    Perhaps because, as BigG says "he is an odious member of our party".
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483

    Greens overtake UKIP
    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1005113528989241344?lang=en-gb
    Was the other way round in the YouGov poll published on 12 June. Lib/Dems though are the same in both polls.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Greens overtake UKIP
    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1005113528989241344?lang=en-gb

    Better to have loved and won than never to have loved at all.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867


    I don’t agree with him on this, but he represents a strand of socially conservative Thatcherite thinking that is deserving of representation at Westminster.


    Well I'm not sure how letting sleazy perv's take pics of women's genitals and share them over the internet without their permission is particularly "socially conservative..."
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    GIN1138 said:

    Trouble is with a majority of over 25,000 in his seat he has a job for life and can basically do whatever the hell he wants without being answerable to anyone.

    Well, he did actually win it off the Lib Dems. Though I think anyone could have done.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Air France 447.
    Excellent analogy!
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Why did Chope object to the private members bill?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094
    edited June 2018

    They are in all parties Malc, sadly
    G , I should have qualified , but Tories seem to have more than their fair share of real bad uns. They have far too many who have no compassion for anything other than themselves and lining their own pockets. I am naturally right wing but could never ever support Tories.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Why did Chope object to the private members bill?

    Maybe he thought that current laws are adequate to cover the situation.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Off topic, it seems that moving house is hard work.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094
    AndyJS said:

    Maybe he thought that current laws are adequate to cover the situation.
    The clown has not got enough brain cells to be able to think cogently.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939
    edited June 2018
    AndyJS said:

    Maybe he thought that current laws are adequate to cover the situation.
    He may think that.
    But he is wrong.
    It is a lazy excuse. And he has admitted he doesn't know what it is.
    He simply blocks any Private Members Bill not by one of his mates.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094
    edited June 2018
    DeClare said:

    Could do with a draw in this game, puts Iran on top of the group! if they should find a way to qualify, they could beat Uruguay in the next round, they have a tremendous defensive record.
    I admire your optimism, I hope it is justified
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,665
    Knicker blocker glory?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,665

    Off topic, it seems that moving house is hard work.

    After my last house move I said never again.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,094

    Knicker blocker glory?

    Your coat awaits Sir
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,029
    malcolmg said:

    G , I should have qualified , but Tories seem to have more than their fair share of real bad uns. They have far too many who have no compassion for anything other than themselves and lining their own pockets. I am naturally right wing but could never ever support Tories.
    Chope has shamed our party today and needs to be called out. As you know I do not like excessive abuse between posters nor do I like fellow conservatives bringing shame on us especially over something that is a no brainer
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Why did Chope object to the private members bill?

    Mendacity.

    Or possibly Moronicity.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,867
    edited June 2018

    Well, he did actually win it off the Lib Dems. Though I think anyone could have done.
    That's true... The Christchurch by-election was one of those famous 1990's Lib-Dem "spectacular's"

    Would be interesting to see what would happen to Sir Christopher if he was forced to fight a by election and all other parties stood aside for the Lib-Dems wouldn't it? ;)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 121,665
    GIN1138 said:

    That's true... The Christchurch by-election was one of those famous 1990's Lib-Dem "spectacular's"

    Would be interesting to see what would happen to Sir Christopher if he was forced to fight a by election and all other parties stood aside for the Lib-Dems would't it? ;)
    About 250 Tory MPs would go campaigning for the Lib Dems.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,255
    GIN1138 said:


    Well I'm not sure how letting sleazy perv's take pics of women's genitals and share them over the internet without their permission is particularly "socially conservative..."
    This also feeds back to the discussion on referendums on the previous thread.

    Apparently electing sleasebags like Chope to represent 100,000 people in Parliament is a better system than letting those 100,000 people directly chose what passes into law.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    GIN1138 said:

    That's true... The Christchurch by-election was one of those famous 1990's Lib-Dem "spectacular's"

    Would be interesting to see what would happen to Sir Christopher if he was forced to fight a by election and all other parties stood aside for the Lib-Dems wouldn't it? ;)
    I'd imagine he was planning to retire soon anyway given his age.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,939

    Chope has shamed our party today and needs to be called out. As you know I do not like excessive abuse between posters nor do I like fellow conservatives bringing shame on us especially over something that is a no brainer
    Your words do you credit.
    Chope, by contrast, is a buffoon. He has made the lead story during the World Cup with a truly spectacular own goal.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Why did Chope object to the private members bill?

    It appears he objects to pretty much every PM Bill being passed on the nod, without scrutiny, as opposed to any objection regarding this specific measure.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309

    Perhaps because, as BigG says "he is an odious member of our party".
    Disagreeing with someone vehemently on a number of issues doesn’t make them odious.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309

    After my last house move I said never again.
    It’s a nightmare.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Off topic, it seems that moving house is hard work.

    You are only meant to move the contents!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,029
    dixiedean said:

    Your words do you credit.
    Chope, by contrast, is a buffoon. He has made the lead story during the World Cup with a truly spectacular own goal.
    I am beyond annoyance with him
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,309
    malcolmg said:

    The clown has not got enough brain cells to be able to think cogently.
    He’s not an idiot. He led Wandsworth Council shortly after the Tories took control in 1978, and drove it to have one of the lowest council taxes in the country using Thatcherite principles.

    And he was knighted for political and public service only this year.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,567

    I think the problem goes further than just one. Ken Clarke said '40-50 MPs' are 'the hard right'. If so, they should be in a different party. In a chamber with PR, they probably *would* constitute a group with its own name, e.g. the Freedom Party.
    There used to be several who clearly wished they were ukip but lacked Carswell's balls to jump.

    PR has issues, but a version of it does feel better to me.
This discussion has been closed.