politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sherrod Brown, victor in Ohio last November, looks increasingl
Comments
-
Is it true it was never paid? I do worry that outside the EU, the ECJ wont even do that, third party countries will just get a shrug. The ECJ were quite emphatic with us in regards to other legislation and fining us accordingly.ydoethur said:
Well, actually, even that doesn't work. Look at the French and their seven year ban on our beef despite being told to lift it. Plus the €100 million euro a day fine that was slapped on them that they never paid.notme2 said:
I kind of think the WTO fairy is a bit over done. I imagine its actual authority is very little. Things just get bogged down for years in negotiations and the miscreant carries on doing what they want.ydoethur said:
OK, here's one for the lawyers.tpfkar said:This feels an important discussion. I'm not convinced it will happen but if it does?
It's the middle of April and Chris Grayling has done it again. Queues across the ports. THe army can't fly enough insulin in and the tabloids are leading on families claiming their loved ones have died due to Brexit. Power cuts across the north. Supermarket shelves running empty. Petrol prices sky-rocketing, airplane capacity slashed and pricey, 50 Tory MPs urge a rethink, wrong to leave hits 70% in polls.
A bit like the US shutdown - fine to hold out in principle but there comes a point where the accumulating pain is just too great.
So what happens? I reckon that a majority would be found to ask for a temporary transition deal 'we pay £X bn for associate membership to end of June' and a withdrawal agreement (more likely than a serious rejoin) is negotiated by then. The EU get what they want with extra pain and humiliation for the Uk - I reckon they might go for it.
If we crash out with No Deal and the Irish agree with the EU not to put up a border - doesn't that mean we can force them to have open borders at the French, Dutch, Belgian and Danish ports as well under WTO rules?
And also, doesn't it mean Poland will have to open the border with Russia and Ukraine?
I think that's what the posters who said there wouldn't be any WTO legal action were rather overlooking...
The only court that can really tell the EU or its member states what to do is the ECJ, everything else is a serving suggestion, a message on a bus and little else...0 -
You can only play against the opponent you are given.Perhaps if Trump had gone against Obama, then Trump may have had more votes. Comparing Romney/Obama vs Trump/Clinton has its limits.Alistair said:
He got less votes than Romney. He got less votes.HYUFD said:
Trump won states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania for the first time for the Republicans since 1988 because he brought in the type of blue collar Democrat who had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate since the Reagan era.Alistair said:I'm loving the idea that Trump, winning less votes than Romney, has created a massive bulwark for the GOP by barley moving their vote share.
Let us ignore the elephant in the room of Hillary shedding 10 percentage points of the Dem vote.
Hillary lost the states by moving backwards.0 -
In other news, if I were a member of the Maduro cabinet I would right now be on my way to Bolivia or Mexico where I could live with the vast sums of money that the good Socialists have
embezzledamassed in the name of the people:
Venezuela crisis: Diplomat to US defects from Maduro
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-47019347
If Maduro's authority is so far shot he can't even break off diplomatic relations and has to back down, and the army are beginning to slip away, it's pretty much game over for him.0 -
Yes. I believe eventually because they were good boys and girls and lifted it after a mere seven years The ECJ decided they didn't need to. Which was silly given the very considerable economic damage to us that we've still never been compensated for.notme2 said:
Is it true it was never paid? I do worry that outside the EU, the ECJ wont even do that, third party countries will just get a shrug. The ECJ were quite emphatic with us in regards to other legislation and fining us accordingly.ydoethur said:
Well, actually, even that doesn't work. Look at the French and their seven year ban on our beef despite being told to lift it. Plus the €100 million euro a day fine that was slapped on them that they never paid.notme2 said:
I kind of think the WTO fairy is a bit over done. I imagine its actual authority is very little. Things just get bogged down for years in negotiations and the miscreant carries on doing what they want.ydoethur said:
OK, here's one for the lawyers.tpfkar said:This feels an important discussion. I'm not convinced it will happen but if it does?
It's the middle of April and Chris Grayling has done it again. Queues across the ports. THe army can't fly enough insulin in and the tabloids are leading on families claiming their loved ones have died due to Brexit. Power cuts across the north. Supermarket shelves running empty. Petrol prices sky-rocketing, airplane capacity slashed and pricey, 50 Tory MPs urge a rethink, wrong to leave hits 70% in polls.
A bit like the US shutdown - fine to hold out in principle but there comes a point where the accumulating pain is just too great.
So what happens? I reckon that a majority would be found to ask for a temporary transition deal 'we pay £X bn for associate membership to end of June' and a withdrawal agreement (more likely than a serious rejoin) is negotiated by then. The EU get what they want with extra pain and humiliation for the Uk - I reckon they might go for it.
If we crash out with No Deal and the Irish agree with the EU not to put up a border - doesn't that mean we can force them to have open borders at the French, Dutch, Belgian and Danish ports as well under WTO rules?
And also, doesn't it mean Poland will have to open the border with Russia and Ukraine?
I think that's what the posters who said there wouldn't be any WTO legal action were rather overlooking...
The only court that can really tell the EU or its member states what to do is the ECJ, everything else is a serving suggestion, a message on a bus and little else...0 -
IANAL. But some things spring to mind.ydoethur said:OK, here's one for the lawyers.
If we crash out with No Deal and the Irish agree with the EU not to put up a border - doesn't that mean we can force them to have open borders at the French, Dutch, Belgian and Danish ports as well under WTO rules?...
* You cannot simultaneously a) sue Ireland for keeping the border open, and b) insist that the border be kept open.
* I do not know the WTO implications of a EU border between Ireland and the European mainland (what Andrew Lilico refers to as a "Celtic Sea" border) are with respect to Ireland.
* I do not know what the WTO implications of UK keeping the Ni/Ire border open.
Personally I think we should Gordian Knot it, close the border and build a big wall with mines and Aliens Sentry guns, and just cope with it. "Take control" means exactly that.
0 -
But how does this show that he was not taking Abbott seriously?MJW said:There was. From the current Labour leadership. John McDonnell wanted to be on the ballot rather than her as the left's standard bearer until it became clear there was no way on Earth Labour MPs would put him on the ballot paper. If only MPs had done the same to Corbyn in 2015 the Labour Party wouldn't be irredeemable.
All it seems to indicate is that Labour MPs did not take him seriously.0 -
Can you however sue them for having an inconsistent border policy? That's what I'm asking as my understanding is without a properly signed agreement all borders should be treated equally. But as I am no expert I am asking whether that is a correct understanding.viewcode said:IANAL. But some things spring to mind.
* You cannot simultaneously a) sue Ireland for keeping the border open, and b) insist that the border be kept open.
* I do not know the WTO implications of a EU border between Ireland and the European mainland (what Andrew Lilico refers to as a "Celtic Sea" border) are with respect to Ireland.
* I do not know what the WTO implications of UK keeping the Ni/Ire border open.
Personally I think we should Gordian Knot it, close the border and build a big wall with mines and Aliens Sentry guns, and just cope with it. "Take control" means exactly that.0 -
Have the Indian bookies got to the spurs players?0
-
I think so, yes.ydoethur said:
Can you however sue them for having an inconsistent border policy? That's what I'm asking as my understanding is without a properly signed agreement all borders should be treated equally. But as I am no expert I am asking whether that is a correct understanding.viewcode said:IANAL. But some things spring to mind.
* You cannot simultaneously a) sue Ireland for keeping the border open, and b) insist that the border be kept open.
* I do not know the WTO implications of a EU border between Ireland and the European mainland (what Andrew Lilico refers to as a "Celtic Sea" border) are with respect to Ireland.
* I do not know what the WTO implications of UK keeping the Ni/Ire border open.
Personally I think we should Gordian Knot it, close the border and build a big wall with mines and Aliens Sentry guns, and just cope with it. "Take control" means exactly that.
But they might respond with "UK is doing that too". But in turn that might not affect the WTO decision, since "He started it!" is not necessarily a valid legal argument.0 -
Nah, they’re always like this at the business end of the season. Just starting the choke a little early this year, that’s all.FrancisUrquhart said:Have the Indian bookies got to the spurs players?
0 -
Which is foolish, for whatever his other faults public and less than public John McDonnell is undoubtedly a very able man and a formidable politician. He is head and shoulders above the rest of the Shadow Cabinet, admittedly a feat about as difficult as melting an ice cream in an oven.kinabalu said:
But how does this show that he was not taking Abbott seriously?MJW said:There was. From the current Labour leadership. John McDonnell wanted to be on the ballot rather than her as the left's standard bearer until it became clear there was no way on Earth Labour MPs would put him on the ballot paper. If only MPs had done the same to Corbyn in 2015 the Labour Party wouldn't be irredeemable.
All it seems to indicate is that Labour MPs did not take him seriously.
The question really in that subject is this. Did Diane Abbott get on the ballot ahead of McDonnell because she was a black woman and those last minute backers (e.g. David Miliband) wanted to show they weren't just a bunch of white blokes with policy wonk pasts? Because if so I don't see how it's racist to point it out. If she was on there to represent the left, as Corbyn was, that's a different matter, but then you're left with the awkward question of how he won so easily and she despite being a much stronger candidate came last.0 -
"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/8924600227725107210 -
Not if we don't impose border controls at the Channel ports ourselves. Which I suspect we won't for the very good reason we haven't the resources to do it in the time left.viewcode said:
I think so, yes.ydoethur said:
Can you however sue them for having an inconsistent border policy? That's what I'm asking as my understanding is without a properly signed agreement all borders should be treated equally. But as I am no expert I am asking whether that is a correct understanding.viewcode said:IANAL. But some things spring to mind.
* You cannot simultaneously a) sue Ireland for keeping the border open, and b) insist that the border be kept open.
* I do not know the WTO implications of a EU border between Ireland and the European mainland (what Andrew Lilico refers to as a "Celtic Sea" border) are with respect to Ireland.
* I do not know what the WTO implications of UK keeping the Ni/Ire border open.
Personally I think we should Gordian Knot it, close the border and build a big wall with mines and Aliens Sentry guns, and just cope with it. "Take control" means exactly that.
But they might respond with "UK is doing that too". But in turn that might not affect the WTO decision, since "He started it!" is not necessarily a valid legal argument.0 -
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.0 -
@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
Ah I replied on PT, so will copy over too.
There are 2 aspects to the DA thing that strike me. The first is the vile racist and sexist abuse she gets online, but there is precious little one can say about this other than what you say here - it's terrible and so are those who do it. All in their right minds agree.
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?0 -
The system for elected candidates was changed after 2010 by Ed Miliband. The unions had a choice between Ed and David they picked Ed, the MPs made that the realistic choice. I think Diane actually did best with the membership but they ultimately knew they realistically had a choice between Ed and David as well.ydoethur said:
Which is foolish, for whatever his other faults public and less than public John McDonnell is undoubtedly a very able man and a formidable politician. He is head and shoulders above the rest of the Shadow Cabinet, admittedly a feat about as difficult as melting an ice cream in an oven.kinabalu said:
But how does this show that he was not taking Abbott seriously?MJW said:There was. From the current Labour leadership. John McDonnell wanted to be on the ballot rather than her as the left's standard bearer until it became clear there was no way on Earth Labour MPs would put him on the ballot paper. If only MPs had done the same to Corbyn in 2015 the Labour Party wouldn't be irredeemable.
All it seems to indicate is that Labour MPs did not take him seriously.
The question really in that subject is this. Did Diane Abbott get on the ballot ahead of McDonnell because she was a black woman and those last minute backers (e.g. David Miliband) wanted to show they weren't just a bunch of white blokes with policy wonk pasts? Because if so I don't see how it's racist to point it out. If she was on there to represent the left, as Corbyn was, that's a different matter, but then you're left with the awkward question of how he won so easily and she despite being a much stronger candidate came last.
The system was 1/3 each of the electoral college. Also Diane is a little more divisive on the left because of sending her child to private school (although I don't share the criticism she lives with the system, she doesn't make it)0 -
I think Sherrod Brown is a good outside shot for the nomination. However, I think he would be a poor nominee and a terrible president0
-
Incorrect. She did best with the unions. She only got 7.3% of the membership, against 12.3% of affiliates:TheJezziah said:
The system for elected candidates was changed after 2010 by Ed Miliband. The unions had a choice between Ed and David they picked Ed, the MPs made that the realistic choice. I think Diane actually did best with the membership but they ultimately knew they realistically had a choice between Ed and David as well.ydoethur said:
Which is foolish, for whatever his other faults public and less than public John McDonnell is undoubtedly a very able man and a formidable politician. He is head and shoulders above the rest of the Shadow Cabinet, admittedly a feat about as difficult as melting an ice cream in an oven.kinabalu said:
But how does this show that he was not taking Abbott seriously?MJW said:There was. From the current Labour leadership. John McDonnell wanted to be on the ballot rather than her as the left's standard bearer until it became clear there was no way on Earth Labour MPs would put him on the ballot paper. If only MPs had done the same to Corbyn in 2015 the Labour Party wouldn't be irredeemable.
All it seems to indicate is that Labour MPs did not take him seriously.
The question really in that subject is this. Did Diane Abbott get on the ballot ahead of McDonnell because she was a black woman and those last minute backers (e.g. David Miliband) wanted to show they weren't just a bunch of white blokes with policy wonk pasts? Because if so I don't see how it's racist to point it out. If she was on there to represent the left, as Corbyn was, that's a different matter, but then you're left with the awkward question of how he won so easily and she despite being a much stronger candidate came last.
The system was 1/3 each of the electoral college. Also Diane is a little more divisive on the left because of sending her child to private school (although I don't share the criticism she lives with the system, she doesn't make it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election#Results
Indeed, she came third - admittedly a poor third - in that category. She was plumb last in both the others.
Edit - you do of course make a good point about the changed system I should have thought of, but she would still have been second last with the new system. Another valid comment would be however that 2015 was an unimpressive field compared to the one in 2010.0 -
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Edit: these allegations came to naught after detailed investigation.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.0 -
Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
0 -
The top brass have profited mightily, but the lower ranks are suffering.ydoethur said:In other news, if I were a member of the Maduro cabinet I would right now be on my way to Bolivia or Mexico where I could live with the vast sums of money that the good Socialists have
embezzledamassed in the name of the people:
Venezuela crisis: Diplomat to US defects from Maduro
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-47019347
If Maduro's authority is so far shot he can't even break off diplomatic relations and has to back down, and the army are beginning to slip away, it's pretty much game over for him.
I suspect the top brass will save themselves by turning on Maduro, as their Romanian counterparts turned on Ceascescu.0 -
I just watched the Fyre documentary on Netflix.
Someone else has said this already, but it is a truly beautiful Brexit analogy: an story of utter chaos, powered by fraud, delusion, and narcissism.0 -
I hadnt seen it like that... But I could see why you did.Gardenwalker said:I just watched the Fyre documentary on Netflix.
Someone else has said this already, but it is a truly beautiful Brexit analogy: an story of utter chaos, powered by fraud, delusion, and narcissism.0 -
Ahh I stand corrected, still the changed system would have changed votes. Members knew they had a choice between 2 people, even if they had overwhelmingly gone for Diane it just would have been for nothing really.ydoethur said:
Incorrect. She did best with the unions. She only got 7.3% of the membership, against 12.3% of affiliates:TheJezziah said:
The system for elected candidates was changed after 2010 by Ed Miliband. The unions had a choice between Ed and David they picked Ed, the MPs made that the realistic choice. I think Diane actually did best with the membership but they ultimately knew they realistically had a choice between Ed and David as well.ydoethur said:
The system was 1/3 each of the electoral college. Also Diane is a little more divisive on the left because of sending her child to private school (although I don't share the criticism she lives with the system, she doesn't make it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election#Results
Indeed, she came third - admittedly a poor third - in that category. She was plumb last in both the others.
Edit - you do of course make a good point about the changed system I should have thought of, but she would still have been second last with the new system. Another valid comment would be however that 2015 was an unimpressive field compared to the one in 2010.
If anything it was for the best at it meant Labour went to OMOV and the members could just pick who they really wanted next time.0 -
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.0 -
I hope you are not getting annoyed about any purported breaking of a completely bogus and utterly made up gramatical "rule" that is utterly unsupported by any contemporary analysis.ydoethur said:
AAAAAAAARGHHHHH!Alistair said:
I was specifically talking about Wisconsin with the less votes comment.HYUFD said:
No he did not get fewer votes, Trump got more votes than Romney in Iowa and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Ohio (fractionally less in Wisconsin) ie the key Midwestern and rustbelt swing states where it mattered in order to win the Electoral College. Even if Romney got a higher voteshare in the popular vote nationwide than Trump (but still fewer votes than Trump nationwide) the popular vote does not determine the Presidency, the Electoral College doesAlistair said:
He got less votes than Romney. He got less votes.HYUFD said:
Trump won states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania for the first time for the Republicans since 1988 because he brought in the type of blue collar Democrat who had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate since the Reagan era.Alistair said:I'm loving the idea that Trump, winning less votes than Romney, has created a massive bulwark for the GOP by barley moving their vote share.
Let us ignore the elephant in the room of Hillary shedding 10 percentage points of the Dem vote.
Hillary lost the states by moving backwards.
Sir, do you order pineapple on pizza while watching The Last Jedi?0 -
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.0 -
"Ireland dashes May’s hopes of breaking Brexit stalemate"
https://www.ft.com/content/3cecf28e-222a-11e9-8ce6-5db4543da6320 -
Yes that's pretty much what happened at the Standard.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Edit: these allegations came to naught after detailed investigation.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Btw, it's Veronica Wadley, not Victoria, and she is now Chair of Arts Council London and board member of Arts Council England. She seems to have a knack of finding sinecures.0 -
Ken Livingstone demonstrates one of the less discussed problems of older candidates. You’d have thought family and long standing friends would discreetly have taken action to look after him.0
-
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. The difficult bits would be how we could rejoin while keeping our opn the EU side would require unanimity, and there would need to be constitutional referenda in several member states in order to ratify.Chris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.Chris said:
But that's what I'm asking. Whether if No Deal happened and the UK decided it was an awful mistake, whether there is any reason the Withdrawal Agreement couldn't then be approved.notme2 said:
If we are going to jump off the cliff of a no deal, unless a whole series of mini agreements are put through before hand theres no coming back. The train wreck will unfold, and theres little you can do to stop it.Chris said:
Hmm.tpfkar said:
I'm having more and more moments where I wish we could have no deal for a fortnight, I just wonder whether we have to fall over the cliff edge to believe it's real and to discredit those who've been tempting us over.
But is that necessarily the case, in practical rather than legal terms? Given that the rest of the EU were willing, if the UK concluded from experience of "No Deal" that the Withdrawal Agreement would be preferable, would it be impossible to agree it with the EU?
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
The ocean on one side, mountains on the other and on a clear day you can see NI, the Isle of Man, across Morecambe Bay and into Scotland from the top of Black Combe.notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
The road over the fells from Gawthwaite to Grizebeck and down to Broughton looking across the estuary is, whatever the time of year, one of the most beautiful in all England.0 -
No.Alistair said:
I hope you are not getting annoyed about any purported breaking of a completely bogus and utterly made up gramatical "rule" that is utterly unsupported by any contemporary analysis.ydoethur said:
AAAAAAAARGHHHHH!Alistair said:
I was specifically talking about Wisconsin with the less votes comment.HYUFD said:
No he did not get fewer votes, Trump got more votes than Romney in Iowa and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Ohio (fractionally less in Wisconsin) ie the key Midwestern and rustbelt swing states where it mattered in order to win the Electoral College. Even if Romney got a higher voteshare in the popular vote nationwide than Trump (but still fewer votes than Trump nationwide) the popular vote does not determine the Presidency, the Electoral College doesAlistair said:
He got less votes than Romney. He got less votes.HYUFD said:
Trump won states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania for the first time for the Republicans since 1988 because he brought in the type of blue collar Democrat who had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate since the Reagan era.Alistair said:I'm loving the idea that Trump, winning less votes than Romney, has created a massive bulwark for the GOP by barley moving their vote share.
Let us ignore the elephant in the room of Hillary shedding 10 percentage points of the Dem vote.
Hillary lost the states by moving backwards.
Sir, do you order pineapple on pizza while watching The Last Jedi?
I'm getting annoyed at you using 'less' when it should be 'fewer!'
0 -
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. The difficult bits would be how we could rejoin while keeping our opn the EU side would require unanimity, and there would need to be constitutional referenda in several member states in order to ratify.Chris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.Chris said:
But that's what I'm asking. Whether if No Deal happened and the UK decided it was an awful mistake, whether there is any reason the Withdrawal Agreement couldn't then be approved.notme2 said:
If we are going to jump off the cliff of a no deal, unless a whole series of mini agreements are put through before hand theres no coming back. The train wreck will unfold, and theres little you can do to stop it.Chris said:
Hmm.
But is that necessarily the case, in practical rather than legal terms? Given that the rest of the EU were willing, if the UK concluded from experience of "No Deal" that the Withdrawal Agreement would be preferable, would it be impossible to agree it with the EU?
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
But enough about the remain campaign...Gardenwalker said:I just watched the Fyre documentary on Netflix.
Someone else has said this already, but it is a truly beautiful Brexit analogy: an story of utter chaos, powered by fraud, delusion, and narcissism.0 -
Didn't he also buy cheap fuel from Venezuela on a deal with Chavez - so cheap that the country produced it at a loss and the workers were plunged into poverty...Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.0 -
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
Ah I replied on PT, so will copy over too.
There are 2 aspects to the DA thing that strike me. The first is the vile racist and sexist abuse she gets online, but there is precious little one can say about this other than what you say here - it's terrible and so are those who do it. All in their right minds agree.
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...0 -
Mr. Meeks, it's true some sceptics are more hardline than others. It's wrong to consider Boris a spokesman for all sceptics.0
-
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.0 -
No, I'm pretty sure it's spelt "Jedi".Alistair said:
I hope you are not getting annoyed about any purported breaking of a completely bogus and utterly made up gramatical "rule" that is utterly unsupported by any contemporary analysis.ydoethur said:
AAAAAAAARGHHHHH!Alistair said:
I was specifically talking about Wisconsin with the less votes comment.HYUFD said:
No he did not get fewer votes, Trump got more votes than Romney in Iowa and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Ohio (fractionally less in Wisconsin) ie the key Midwestern and rustbelt swing states where it mattered in order to win the Electoral College. Even if Romney got a higher voteshare in the popular vote nationwide than Trump (but still fewer votes than Trump nationwide) the popular vote does not determine the Presidency, the Electoral College doesAlistair said:
He got less votes than Romney. He got less votes.HYUFD said:
Trump won states like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania for the first time for the Republicans since 1988 because he brought in the type of blue collar Democrat who had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate since the Reagan era.Alistair said:I'm loving the idea that Trump, winning less votes than Romney, has created a massive bulwark for the GOP by barley moving their vote share.
Let us ignore the elephant in the room of Hillary shedding 10 percentage points of the Dem vote.
Hillary lost the states by moving backwards.
Sir, do you order pineapple on pizza while watching The Last Jedi?
0 -
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.Chris said:
But that's what I'm asking. Whether if No Deal happened and the UK decided it was an awful mistake, whether there is any reason the Withdrawal Agreement couldn't then be approved.notme2 said:
If we are going to jump off the cliff of a no deal, unless a whole series of mini agreements are put through before hand theres no coming back. The train wreck will unfold, and theres little you can do to stop it.Chris said:
Hmm.
But is that necessarily the case, in practical rather than legal terms? Given that the rest of the EU were willing, if the UK concluded from experience of "No Deal" that the Withdrawal Agreement would be preferable, would it be impossible to agree it with the EU?
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
-
In fairness to Ken this is actually an article and comments from a couple of years back rather than new ones...AlastairMeeks said:Ken Livingstone demonstrates one of the less discussed problems of older candidates. You’d have thought family and long standing friends would discreetly have taken action to look after him.
0 -
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
Ah I replied on PT, so will copy over too.
There are 2 aspects to the DA thing that strike me. The first is the vile racist and sexist abuse she gets online, but there is precious little one can say about this other than what you say here - it's terrible and so are those who do it. All in their right minds agree.
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.0 -
Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.0 -
You know who else had some weird 1930s totalitarian branding...Gardenwalker said:
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.0 -
This is going to be the very first digital civil emergency.Scott_P said:
I am reminded of the London riots.
Going into Twitter to get up-to-the minute reports I saw that the police had closed Lordship Lane (to Dulwich Village), to which someone had responded, “Does anyone know if this means my Waitrose delivery will still get through????”0 -
DA used to be quite smart and quick witted, but I think her health is not what it was, and this affects her work.TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
Ah I replied on PT, so will copy over too.
There are 2 aspects to the DA thing that strike me. The first is the vile racist and sexist abuse she gets online, but there is precious little one can say about this other than what you say here - it's terrible and so are those who do it. All in their right minds agree.
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...0 -
There are, as is well known, two sorts of male drivers.kinabalu said:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.ydoethur said:The question really in that subject is this. Did Diane Abbott get on the ballot ahead of McDonnell because she was a black woman and those last minute backers (e.g. David Miliband) wanted to show they weren't just a bunch of white blokes with policy wonk pasts? Because if so I don't see how it's racist to point it out. If she was on there to represent the left, as Corbyn was, that's a different matter, but then you're left with the awkward question of how he won so easily and she despite being a much stronger candidate came last.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
There are useless numpties who shouldn't be behind the wheel of a car, don't know the rules of the road, and aren't fit to pilot a scooter.
And there's me.0 -
@ ydoether
Quoting up spout!
I am you and you are me and we are we and we are all together.
EDIT: Ah well done. Feel myself again now ... 0 -
People make mistakes all the time, Hammond was many factors out further than Diane. The papers and others whip up against her more than Hammond partially because they are just right wing but it is her being Black that helps move the idea as well.ydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.
Until politics catches up more to the territory we have in football people like Diane will suffer, the good thing is people like Diane are the pioneers that make it easier for the next generation. She is an inspiration the way she takes all the jokes from racists, mild racists and those who should know better.0 -
I do think that if you are presenting yourself as a possible Home Secretary it is incumbent on you to do the necessary presentation and hard work before going into an interview. She didn't and was rightly criticised. I did have some sympathy when I learnt that she was ill. But if she is not up to the job then it is fair enough to point it out. It is not necessary to be abusive in a racist or sexist manner in doing so.TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
A
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
She does not have a particularly simpatica personality - at least some of the time - though on Andrew Neil's show she could come across quite well, probably helped by having a very long-standing friendship with Michael Portillo with whom she was at school.
I don't think a huge amount of her abilities though on stuff like detention without trial she was very good indeed. But she certainly does not deserve the level of really quite horrible abuse she gets. She is not however the only person to get abuse and if you are going to complain about it (my choice would be to ignore) then you should make sure there are no beams in your own eyes before attacking others' motes.0 -
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
While not disputing the errors Hammond made over HS2, which are disastrous, did Hammond give two directly contradictory figures within thirty seconds?TheJezziah said:
People make mistakes all the time, Hammond was many factors out further than Diane. The papers and others whip up against her more than Hammond partially because they are just right wing but it is her being Black that helps move the idea as well.ydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.
Until politics catches up more to the territory we have in football people like Diane will suffer, the good thing is people like Diane are the pioneers that make it easier for the next generation. She is an inspiration the way she takes all the jokes from racists, mild racists and those who should know better.0 -
To be fair, we all have prejudices. That's human. At one end, prejudice is harmless, at the other end, it's murderous.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.0 -
Oh sure. Plus Boris - then - seemed jolly and positive. And Ken did not.Gardenwalker said:
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.0 -
I don't think that you are correct. In the current excellent colourblind version of Les Mis on Sunday, the two main villains of the story are played by BME actors, Javert and the Innkeeper. Both very well cast and played IMO.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
As ever, playing the villain is more fun, but surely not the sort of "political correctness" that you cite.0 -
Without a doubt. I very often end up around Loweswater and Ennerdale on work related matters. Stunningly beautiful and remote. But Millom is even remote to that, how remote do you have to be to for it to be acceptable to have an A classification road going through a farm yard?Cyclefree said:
The ocean on one side, mountains on the other and on a clear day you can see NI, the Isle of Man, across Morecambe Bay and into Scotland from the top of Black Combe.notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
The road over the fells from Gawthwaite to Grizebeck and down to Broughton looking across the estuary is, whatever the time of year, one of the most beautiful in all England.0 -
He also chimed with London's cosmopolitan, international and outward-looking culture..Cyclefree said:
Oh sure. Plus Boris - then - seemed jolly and positive. And Ken did not.Gardenwalker said:
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.
Was he conning us, or did he change?0 -
I'm not sure prejudice is 'harmless.' It can be not dangerous, which is different.Sean_F said:
To be fair, we all have prejudices. That's human. At one end, prejudice is harmless, at the other end, it's murderous.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
A sensible person knows their own prejudices and works to overcome them.0 -
Excellent header.
Can I make a modest claim to have been first to punt Sherrod back in October?
I have him at 75 for dem candidate.0 -
Who is the real Boris Johnson?Peter_the_Punter said:
He also chimed with London's cosmopolitan, international and outward-looking culture..Cyclefree said:
Oh sure. Plus Boris - then - seemed jolly and positive. And Ken did not.Gardenwalker said:
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.
Was he conning us, or did he change?
I’m not even sure Boris knows.
However he has a long term record of deceit and narcissism. To that extent, perhaps there is no *real* Boris; he is whatever you want him to be if he thinks it will serve his interests.0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
It is quite extraordinary. The party of Mrs T - who worshipped business - is now behaving in a way that makes Labour seem sane on the question of business friendly environments.Sean_F said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.AlastairMeeks said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.Sean_F said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Recidivist said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.notme2 said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.
Being sceptical (in the best senses of that word) about grand ideas and projects is one thing and can be healthy and necessary. But the euroscepticism of too many Tory MPs has morphed into an irrational hatred which will destroy their party and risks causing great harm to Britain. I find it very puzzling.0 -
I have no problem with valid criticism, getting figures wrong is validly worth criticising. I mean personally and to give an opposition example, Hammond being out by about 20B on the HS2 figure actually means nothing to me, remembering random figures (or failing to) isn't necessarily essential. If Hammond or Abbot could literally remember nothing then that might be a problem but forgetting some figures out of the many things they have to remember isn't a huge problem for me but I can fully understand why others would either think it was a big problem or would at least pretend to do so for political effect.Cyclefree said:
I do think that if you are presenting yourself as a possible Home Secretary it is incumbent on you to do the necessary presentation and hard work before going into an interview. She didn't and was rightly criticised. I did have some sympathy when I learnt that she was ill. But if she is not up to the job then it is fair enough to point it out. It is not necessary to be abusive in a racist or sexist manner in doing so.TheJezziah said:kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
A
She does not have a particularly simpatica personality - at least some of the time - though on Andrew Neil's show she could come across quite well, probably helped by having a very long-standing friendship with Michael Portillo with whom she was at school.
I don't think a huge amount of her abilities though on stuff like detention without trial she was very good indeed. But she certainly does not deserve the level of really quite horrible abuse she gets. She is not however the only person to get abuse and if you are going to complain about it (my choice would be to ignore) then you should make sure there are no beams in your own eyes before attacking others' motes.0 -
The dignity of work.
Great line from Brown.0 -
"A terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible week for Tottenham."0
-
Is that really more disastrous?ydoethur said:
While not disputing the errors Hammond made over HS2, which are disastrous, did Hammond give two directly contradictory figures within thirty seconds?TheJezziah said:
People make mistakes all the time, Hammond was many factors out further than Diane. The papers and others whip up against her more than Hammond partially because they are just right wing but it is her being Black that helps move the idea as well.ydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.
Until politics catches up more to the territory we have in football people like Diane will suffer, the good thing is people like Diane are the pioneers that make it easier for the next generation. She is an inspiration the way she takes all the jokes from racists, mild racists and those who should know better.
I mean as in my above post neither actually matter that much as the worst that would happen in reality is Hammond or Abbot would leave the interview and find out they were wrong (if the interviewer didn't correct them)
To take the Hammond example we weren't actually going to be £20B off on funding it, he just got the figure wrong in an interview.
Whilst there is something to be said for being sharp in interviews I've never been sure it is the key thing.
0 -
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
And what's wrong with that, eh?notme2 said:
Without a doubt. I very often end up around Loweswater and Ennerdale on work related matters. Stunningly beautiful and remote. But Millom is even remote to that, how remote do you have to be to for it to be acceptable to have an A classification road going through a farm yard?Cyclefree said:
The ocean on one side, mountains on the other and on a clear day you can see NI, the Isle of Man, across Morecambe Bay and into Scotland from the top of Black Combe.notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
The road over the fells from Gawthwaite to Grizebeck and down to Broughton looking across the estuary is, whatever the time of year, one of the most beautiful in all England.
I love remote places. Millom and the area around it reminds me in many ways of the Ireland of my childhood, though the mountains are much nicer in Cumbria. Still Millom is not so remote as all that: it has a very good Comedy Club which gets all the pre-tours of comics - at a fraction of the cost and in a much nicer ambience.
And it has one recent claim to fame - or infamy. It was Trudy Harrison's victory in the constituency in 2016 which resulted in Mrs May visiting the main square in Millom to celebrate. We all know what the hubris from that victory led to .......
What sort of work brings you to the Lakes, if you don't mind me asking?0 -
Yes. Because it shows it wasn't a slip of memory.TheJezziah said:
Is that really more disastrous?ydoethur said:
While not disputing the errors Hammond made over HS2, which are disastrous, did Hammond give two directly contradictory figures within thirty seconds?TheJezziah said:
People make mistakes all the time, Hammond was many factors out further than Diane. The papers and others whip up against her more than Hammond partially because they are just right wing but it is her being Black that helps move the idea as well.ydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.
Until politics catches up more to the territory we have in football people like Diane will suffer, the good thing is people like Diane are the pioneers that make it easier for the next generation. She is an inspiration the way she takes all the jokes from racists, mild racists and those who should know better.
I mean as in my above post neither actually matter that much as the worst that would happen in reality is Hammond or Abbot would leave the interview and find out they were wrong (if the interviewer didn't correct them)
To take the Hammond example we weren't actually going to be £20B off on funding it, he just got the figure wrong in an interview.
Whilst there is something to be said for being sharp in interviews I've never been sure it is the key thing.0 -
He was a capable Mayor. Skilled with the politics and both creative and pragmatic on policy. Above average in this regard.Cyclefree said:Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
Going loco now, sadly.0 -
Are we heading towards crisis levels of England from our lofty position as the best NHS in UK.Scott_P said:0 -
Playing the villain is best. I loved being Herod in nativity plays.Foxy said:
I don't think that you are correct. In the current excellent colourblind version of Les Mis on Sunday, the two main villains of the story are played by BME actors, Javert and the Innkeeper. Both very well cast and played IMO.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
As ever, playing the villain is more fun, but surely not the sort of "political correctness" that you cite.0 -
It really isn’t clear at all. The Conservatives’ top priority and new shibboleth is actively in conflict with capitalism now. That doesn’t look like ending any time soon.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.0 -
I believe you are after '2nd letter Boris' who needed to be killed in pursuit of the leadership.Peter_the_Punter said:
He also chimed with London's cosmopolitan, international and outward-looking culture..Cyclefree said:
Oh sure. Plus Boris - then - seemed jolly and positive. And Ken did not.Gardenwalker said:
Yes I am agreeing with you.Cyclefree said:
Er ..... he had invited Al-Qaradawi to City Hall in 2004. And was pretty severely criticised by those who wondered what he was doing inviting a person with such views onto such a big stage. His views were out in the open while he was Mayor. His friendships with terrorists and appeasers and justifiers of terrorists was well known while he was in charge of the GLC.Gardenwalker said:
Ken was actually a decent mayor in his first term, and only lost to Johnson after being mired in allegations of cronyism related to his Equalities (and Policing) Director Lee Jasper after a campaign in the Evening Standard by Andrew Gilligan.ydoethur said:
I just can't believe how dumb some of these people are.williamglenn said:"I'll tell you who executed their opponents..."
https://twitter.com/GilesUdy/status/892460022772510721
At least we now see how he lost twice to a pseud like Boris.
Upon becoming mayor, Boris Johnson then appointed both Gilligan and the editor of the Evening Standard Victoria Wadley into official sinecures.
Livingstone’s true, anti-Semitic, pro-socialist dictatorship colours weren’t soooo obvious in 2008, except perhaps to long time Livingstone watchers.
Livingstone got in first time because his opponents was rubbish and because many voters wanted to cock a snook at Blair's attempts to control everything within Labour and because too many people fell for Ken's cheeky-but-basically-lovable rebel act. He always was a nasty piece of work and a weathervane, too, all too willing to suck up to money when it suited him. London is well rid of him.
But from memory, none of this really resonated with the man in the street and it was the Lee Jasper campaign by the Evening Standard that really dented him.
He always had a soft spot for dictators of various stripes.
One of the weird things I noted in his first term is that official GLA advertising would often carry an actual headshot of Ken, like something out of Cuba — and for a while they even adopted some weird 1930s totalitarian branding.
Was he conning us, or did he change?0 -
I have a special fondness for Nidderdale, near Pateley Bridge, which is way off the beaten track.Cyclefree said:
And what's wrong with that, eh?notme2 said:
Without a doubt. I very often end up around Loweswater and Ennerdale on work related matters. Stunningly beautiful and remote. But Millom is even remote to that, how remote do you have to be to for it to be acceptable to have an A classification road going through a farm yard?Cyclefree said:
The ocean on one side, mountains on the other and on a clear day you can see NI, the Isle of Man, across Morecambe Bay and into Scotland from the top of Black Combe.notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
The road over the fells from Gawthwaite to Grizebeck and down to Broughton looking across the estuary is, whatever the time of year, one of the most beautiful in all England.
I love remote places. Millom and the area around it reminds me in many ways of the Ireland of my childhood, though the mountains are much nicer in Cumbria. Still Millom is not so remote as all that: it has a very good Comedy Club which gets all the pre-tours of comics - at a fraction of the cost and in a much nicer ambience.
And it has one recent claim to fame - or infamy. It was Trudy Harrison's victory in the constituency in 2016 which resulted in Mrs May visiting the main square in Millom to celebrate. We all know what the hubris from that victory led to .......
What sort of work brings you to the Lakes, if you don't mind me asking?0 -
I think, with respect, you are being a touch complacent. We are reading in the papers of possible martial law - in Britain, for God's sake - of the use of the Civil Contingencies Act, which permits the confiscation of assets, of companies planning to move out of Britain if there is a No Deal exit. God knows what this means for the value of the pound, for jobs, for prospects. There is more than one way of losing capital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
On The Food Programme on Radio 4 today, there was someone running a veg basket business who said that he was very worried indeed about No Deal - because if the disruption lasted more than a few days, his business would be in serious difficulties and much longer than that and he would be in breach of banking covenants. So he faces potential ruin. It is not at all clear that someone like him would view the Tories as being the party helping him preserve his capital.0 -
Very close to a "Conservatives take Bootle"... headlineCyclefree said:
And what's wrong with that, eh?notme2 said:
Without a doubt. I very often end up around Loweswater and Ennerdale on work related matters. Stunningly beautiful and remote. But Millom is even remote to that, how remote do you have to be to for it to be acceptable to have an A classification road going through a farm yard?Cyclefree said:
The ocean on one side, mountains on the other and on a clear day you can see NI, the Isle of Man, across Morecambe Bay and into Scotland from the top of Black Combe.notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.
The road over the fells from Gawthwaite to Grizebeck and down to Broughton looking across the estuary is, whatever the time of year, one of the most beautiful in all England.
I love remote places. Millom and the area around it reminds me in many ways of the Ireland of my childhood, though the mountains are much nicer in Cumbria. Still Millom is not so remote as all that: it has a very good Comedy Club which gets all the pre-tours of comics - at a fraction of the cost and in a much nicer ambience.
And it has one recent claim to fame - or infamy. It was Trudy Harrison's victory in the constituency in 2016 which resulted in Mrs May visiting the main square in Millom to celebrate. We all know what the hubris from that victory led to .......
What sort of work brings you to the Lakes, if you don't mind me asking?
Live in Cumbria....0 -
Interesting. I've never viewed Javert as any more of a villain than Valjean - his job is to catch criminals, and he's doing it to the best of his ability. I'm not sure the current adaptation portrays him in a less favourable light. Marius' grandfather, on the other hand, seems to be getting a right kicking that I don't recall from the book.Foxy said:
I don't think that you are correct. In the current excellent colourblind version of Les Mis on Sunday, the two main villains of the story are played by BME actors, Javert and the Innkeeper. Both very well cast and played IMO.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
As ever, playing the villain is more fun, but surely not the sort of "political correctness" that you cite.0 -
The Tories have bet the farm on austerity and Brexit. They have forgotten that Thatcher’s Tories won three elections as the party of aspiration.AlastairMeeks said:
It really isn’t clear at all. The Conservatives’ top priority and new shibboleth is actively in conflict with capitalism now. That doesn’t look like ending any time soon.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are goingnotme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?0 -
They don’t embezzle. They hold it in trust for the people and use it at their discretion to further the welfare of peopleydoethur said:In other news, if I were a member of the Maduro cabinet I would right now be on my way to Bolivia or Mexico where I could live with the vast sums of money that the good Socialists have
embezzledamassed in the name of the people:
Venezuela crisis: Diplomat to US defects from Maduro
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-47019347
If Maduro's authority is so far shot he can't even break off diplomatic relations and has to back down, and the army are beginning to slip away, it's pretty much game over for him.0 -
The sociologically interesting point is that the Tories now seem to be full of people who don’t actually understand business at all.Cyclefree said:
I think, with respect, you are being a touch complacent. We are reading in the papers of possible martial law - in Britain, for God's sake - of the use of the Civil Contingencies Act, which permits the confiscation of assets, of companies planning to move out of Britain if there is a No Deal exit. God knows what this means for the value of the pound, for jobs, for prospects. There is more than one way of losing capital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
On The Food Programme on Radio 4 today, there was someone running a veg basket business who said that he was very worried indeed about No Deal - because if the disruption lasted more than a few days, his business would be in serious difficulties and much longer than that and he would be in breach of banking covenants. So he faces potential ruin. It is not at all clear that someone like him would view the Tories as being the party helping him preserve his capital.
Most businessmen and women wouldn’t put all their money into unicorns.0 -
Mr. Punter, Boris' EU positioning was entirely about him trying to win the Conservative leadership.
Being an idiot, he won the contest he didn't care about and failed to even compete in the contest that he really wanted to win.0 -
What ever happened to Millifandom?notme2 said:
Millom truly is the back of beyond.Cyclefree said:Well, in an attempt to bring some sweetness and light and a topic other than B*****, you can see the nearest town to me in Cumbria beat Red Star Belgrade in the rugby.
Look at that blue sky - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/rugby-league/46633025.0 -
If you are talking about the first interview on the video you displayed* then she says I think it is about 50 seats he says it is 125 and then she says it was 100 last time I saw but it is an evolving situation.ydoethur said:
Yes. Because it shows it wasn't a slip of memory.TheJezziah said:
Is that really more disastrous?ydoethur said:
While not disputing the errors Hammond made over HS2, which are disastrous, did Hammond give two directly contradictory figures within thirty seconds?TheJezziah said:ydoethur said:TheJezziah said:kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
I mean as in my above post neither actually matter that much as the worst that would happen in reality is Hammond or Abbot would leave the interview and find out they were wrong (if the interviewer didn't correct them)
To take the Hammond example we weren't actually going to be £20B off on funding it, he just got the figure wrong in an interview.
Whilst there is something to be said for being sharp in interviews I've never been sure it is the key thing.
Without knowing what she's is actually thinking there could be lots of reasons for this one of which could be a slip of memory, if you have seen a figure (of 100) but can't remember the interviewer giving a figure could trigger your memory.
*which is quite amusing as this first interview had nothing to do with calculations but for some reason the video had a calculator. These right wing racist types are so thick they don't even understand that, quite amusing they claim Abbot is thick when you think about it....0 -
Too clever by half?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Punter, Boris' EU positioning was entirely about him trying to win the Conservative leadership.
Being an idiot, he won the contest he didn't care about and failed to even compete in the contest that he really wanted to win.
I've been wondering how likely he is to hold his W London seat at the next GE. Wish I could get some odds.0 -
I don't know, unicorns sound like a damn good investment to me.Gardenwalker said:
The sociologically interesting point is that the Tories now seem to be full of people who don’t actually understand business at all.Cyclefree said:
I think, with respect, you are being a touch complacent. We are reading in the papers of possible martial law - in Britain, for God's sake - of the use of the Civil Contingencies Act, which permits the confiscation of assets, of companies planning to move out of Britain if there is a No Deal exit. God knows what this means for the value of the pound, for jobs, for prospects. There is more than one way of losing capital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
On The Food Programme on Radio 4 today, there was someone running a veg basket business who said that he was very worried indeed about No Deal - because if the disruption lasted more than a few days, his business would be in serious difficulties and much longer than that and he would be in breach of banking covenants. So he faces potential ruin. It is not at all clear that someone like him would view the Tories as being the party helping him preserve his capital.
Most businessmen and women wouldn’t put all their money into unicorns.0 -
Point out that a majority of Conservative MPs backed the Withdrawal Agreement.Gardenwalker said:
The sociologically interesting point is that the Tories now seem to be full of people who don’t actually understand business at all.Cyclefree said:
I think, with respect, you are being a touch complacent. We are reading in the papers of possible martial law - in Britain, for God's sake - of the use of the Civil Contingencies Act, which permits the confiscation of assets, of companies planning to move out of Britain if there is a No Deal exit. God knows what this means for the value of the pound, for jobs, for prospects. There is more than one way of losing capital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
On The Food Programme on Radio 4 today, there was someone running a veg basket business who said that he was very worried indeed about No Deal - because if the disruption lasted more than a few days, his business would be in serious difficulties and much longer than that and he would be in breach of banking covenants. So he faces potential ruin. It is not at all clear that someone like him would view the Tories as being the party helping him preserve his capital.
Most businessmen and women wouldn’t put all their money into unicorns.0 -
The story of Valjean is one of repentance and redemption, with Inspector Javert as the unforgiving past that keeps re-appearing. In the end Javert cannot cope when Valjean demonstrates his reformed heart by sparing him.Endillion said:
Interesting. I've never viewed Javert as any more of a villain than Valjean - his job is to catch criminals, and he's doing it to the best of his ability. I'm not sure the current adaptation portrays him in a less favourable light. Marius' grandfather, on the other hand, seems to be getting a right kicking that I don't recall from the book.Foxy said:
I don't think that you are correct. In the current excellent colourblind version of Les Mis on Sunday, the two main villains of the story are played by BME actors, Javert and the Innkeeper. Both very well cast and played IMO.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
As ever, playing the villain is more fun, but surely not the sort of "political correctness" that you cite.0 -
The point is she does it too often. Anyone can make a mistake. That's allowed. She simply plucks figures from the air and doesn't even try to reconcile them. (Epitaph for Corbynism?)TheJezziah said:
If you are talking about the first interview on the video you displayed* then she says I think it is about 50 seats he says it is 125 and then she says it was 100 last time I saw but it is an evolving situation.ydoethur said:
Yes. Because it shows it wasn't a slip of memory.TheJezziah said:
Is that really more disastrous?ydoethur said:
While not disputing the errors Hammond made over HS2, which are disastrous, did Hammond give two directly contradictory figures within thirty seconds?TheJezziah said:ydoethur said:TheJezziah said:kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
I mean as in my above post neither actually matter that much as the worst that would happen in reality is Hammond or Abbot would leave the interview and find out they were wrong (if the interviewer didn't correct them)
To take the Hammond example we weren't actually going to be £20B off on funding it, he just got the figure wrong in an interview.
Whilst there is something to be said for being sharp in interviews I've never been sure it is the key thing.
Without knowing what she's is actually thinking there could be lots of reasons for this one of which could be a slip of memory, if you have seen a figure (of 100) but can't remember the interviewer giving a figure could trigger your memory.
*which is quite amusing as this first interview had nothing to do with calculations but for some reason the video had a calculator. These right wing racist types are so thick they don't even understand that, quite amusing they claim Abbot is thick when you think about it....
And even Have I Got News For You showed that clip as 'Abbott making another error with numbers.'0 -
And outside of the police and local authorities 'austerity' was a marketing gimmick.Gardenwalker said:
The Tories have bet the farm on austerity and Brexit. They have forgotten that Thatcher’s Tories won three elections as the party of aspiration.AlastairMeeks said:
It really isn’t clear at all. The Conservatives’ top priority and new shibboleth is actively in conflict with capitalism now. That doesn’t look like ending any time soon.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are goingnotme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. TheChris said:
Yes, I realise some changes in wording might be necessary - that's why I said "in practical rather than legal terms". My question is whether there'oth parties decided it would be to their advantage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?0 -
QED.Endillion said:
I don't know, unicorns sound like a damn good investment to me.Gardenwalker said:
The sociologically interesting point is that the Tories now seem to be full of people who don’t actually understand business at all.Cyclefree said:
I think, with respect, you are being a touch complacent. We are reading in the papers of possible martial law - in Britain, for God's sake - of the use of the Civil Contingencies Act, which permits the confiscation of assets, of companies planning to move out of Britain if there is a No Deal exit. God knows what this means for the value of the pound, for jobs, for prospects. There is more than one way of losing capital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
On The Food Programme on Radio 4 today, there was someone running a veg basket business who said that he was very worried indeed about No Deal - because if the disruption lasted more than a few days, his business would be in serious difficulties and much longer than that and he would be in breach of banking covenants. So he faces potential ruin. It is not at all clear that someone like him would view the Tories as being the party helping him preserve his capital.
Most businessmen and women wouldn’t put all their money into unicorns.0 -
So we hear, but it we heard the same about die hard ideological socialists in the Labour Party in the eighties. But it turned out they were flexible enough to shift to a more elector friendly position when the right leader turned up. And try the thought experiment of how a narrow remain win would have affected the Tories under Cameron. I have a feeling a lot of them would have decided that the EU was not so bad after all.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:
We are going to rejoin. Why would the terms be punitive? What even is the meaning of punitive in this context? A lot of people on this very forum object to things that others on it regard as benefits.notme2 said:
We aint going back in if we leave. The best remainers could hope for would be norway model with a swiss style process of step by step opt into different institutions etc.Sandpit said:
The EU have said that they’d need to follow article 49 which covers entry. The difficult bits would be how we could rejoin while keeping our opn the EU side would require unanimity, and there would need to be constitutional referenda in several member states in order to ratify.Chris said:
Yage.williamglenn said:
The WA itself, no, because by definition once we're out, the treaties will cease to apply and wea full ratification by the EU27 member states.Chris said:
ed.notme2 said:
If we are going to jump off the cliff of a no deal, unless a whole series of mini agreements are put through before hand theres no coming back. The train wreck will unfold, and theres little you can do to stop it.Chris said:
Hmm.tpfkar said:
I'm having more and more moments where I wish we could have no deal for a fortnight, I just wonder whether we have to fall over the cliff edge to believe it's real and to discredit those who've been tempting us over.
BuU?
If we rejected our membership on the current dreadful deal, how likely are we to re-enter on what would be a punitive deal?
We can't to back to 2016, let alone 1971. Our new membership will be different to the one we've left behind. I'm hoping we'll finally start playing a full positive role and reaping the full benefits. I think once we've got the euroskeptics out of the Conservative Party everything will be plain sailing.
The Vicar of Bray would be at home in both the main parties.0 -
The villain is the system though surely, not its representative? Hugo is having a go at a system that destroys a man's life for trying to feed his starving family and won't let him back into society even after serving his sentence, continually pushing him back towards crime. The whole point is that all men have good inside them but circumstances force them to behave like animals, ergo something about socialism.Foxy said:
The story of Valjean is one of repentance and redemption, with Inspector Javert as the unforgiving past that keeps re-appearing. In the end Javert cannot cope when Valjean demonstrates his reformed heart by sparing him.Endillion said:
Interesting. I've never viewed Javert as any more of a villain than Valjean - his job is to catch criminals, and he's doing it to the best of his ability. I'm not sure the current adaptation portrays him in a less favourable light. Marius' grandfather, on the other hand, seems to be getting a right kicking that I don't recall from the book.Foxy said:
I don't think that you are correct. In the current excellent colourblind version of Les Mis on Sunday, the two main villains of the story are played by BME actors, Javert and the Innkeeper. Both very well cast and played IMO.kinabalu said:Apologies 'ydoether', I messed up the quotes, but replying to you about RACISM:
Let me pivot from Diane and take the more general point that you raise.
If a 'person of colour' gets preferential treatment on account of it, it is not IMO racist to point this out.
For example(ish), when I watch a TV crime drama and there is just the one prominent black character in it, I know for a fact that he or she will NOT be the murderer.
Is it racist of me to simply share that with you people on here? No.
But if I continually go on and on and on about it - how PC diversity is just ruining decent television these days - how it's got to one of the very worst things about modern Britain - if, you know, I come over all rod liddle about it, then there's a very good chance that I am (like him) at least a teeny bit racist.
Tricky thing, racism, because it is prevalent yet no-one ever admits to it. If we did an 'are you racist?' survey it would return close to 0% yes - we would think the problem had gone away entirely.
Bit like (with men) 'are you a bad driver?' If we self-assessed that, there would not be any. Not even the Duke.
And yet, as we know, there are loads. Ditto racists.
And some of those racists are also bad drivers, I would imagine.
Any correlation? ... er, steady on! Stop typing now. Don't overdo it.
As ever, playing the villain is more fun, but surely not the sort of "political correctness" that you cite.0 -
Abbott made a stupid mistake (she said £300k instead of £300m) but it’s pretty meaningless - she then got frazzled under pressure. It’s a bit embarrassing for a senior politician but about the level of not knowing the price of a pint of milkydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.0 -
The Tories cutting through are May, Rees-Mogg, and Johnson in that order. And we know that the next Tory leader must be a hard Brexiter - maybe even a no deal Brexiter - because of what is now a rabid party membership.notme2 said:
Point out that a majority of Conservative MPs backed the Withdrawal Agreement.Gardenwalker said:
The sociologically interesting point is that the Tories now seem to be full of people who don’t actually understand business at all.Cyclefree said:
Iital.Sean_F said:
I don't view the Conservatives as a death cult, though some MP's are plainly mad. But, if you have capital, and your main priority is to keep it, it's clear how you should vote.AlastairMeeks said:
Because of Brexit, the Conservative party is turning into a party of centralised state planning and surly populism as it determines the exonomy’s needs sector by sector for immigrants, sabotages supply lines and party talking heads queue up to denounce business leaders who make inconvenient announcements that show Brexit in a poor light. No wonder donors are sitting on their hands. They’re not going to hang about as the death cult gets ever more maniacal.Sean_F said:
Capitalists will always be Conservative, until a more capitalistic party turns up.AlastairMeeks said:
The Eurosceptocs are driving the capitalists out. “Fuck business” takes precedence now and the capitalists have noticed.Sean_F said:
The eurosceptics are the root and marrow of the Conservative Party. You might just as well wish for the removal of monarchists or capitalists from the Conservatives.Recidivist said:notme2 said:Sandpit said:Chris said:williamglenn said:
Most businessmen and women wouldn’t put all their money into unicorns.
The Tory brand is Ratnered for anyone under the age of 50. (I would argue that Labour’s brand is less tarnished and has every chance of recovery post Corbyn).0 -
Abbott is worse because she is a hypocriteCharles said:
Abbott made a stupid mistake (she said £300k instead of £300m) but it’s pretty meaningless - she then got frazzled under pressure. It’s a bit embarrassing for a senior politician but about the level of not knowing the price of a pint of milkydoethur said:
Hmmm:TheJezziah said:
You have had plenty of footballers from the past talking about similar experiences, even aside from the overt racism there was always just extra demands on them and people will to pull them up twice as much over the slightest mistake, the crowd was never as forgiving with the Black players. It is why Diane gets claimed as some kind of moron who doesn't understand numbers and the idea successfully catches when she makes a single mistake on police numbers in the build up to the election.kinabalu said:@ Cyclefree (re Abbott)
The other thing is more insidious and (to me) subtle and interesting. The way that perfectly intelligent and balanced people (in most respects) will kind of compete to come up with the 'best' Diane Abbott joke on a regular basis - happens both online and out there in the land of the living. These gags will not ostensibly be racist or sexist or 'fatist' - not usually - will probably be about numbers - but the relentlessness of it and the tone in which it is purveyed is unpleasant.
IMO someone engaging in this very frequently has, as they say, 'questions to answer'. Not in the menacing way of that phrase, but to themselves - why are they doing it?
I think it was around the same time Hammond underestimated HS2 by about £20B, a far bigger and more serious error than Abbotts.
The stupid thing is neither of those were actually based on maths ability, neither person was presented sums they had to figure out to get the right answer. The problem was memory. Which is kind of funny that you have some right wingers laughing at her for not being good at numeracy and variations on that when they aren't even smart enough to figure out her memory was the issue in that incident.
I bet Diane could figure that out, she is a bit smarter than most of her critics in fairness...
https://youtu.be/cYZ262b7wBI
Just watch the first minute.
OK, so she had an excuse in that she was ill with a long term condition that wasn't being well managed.
However...as with Rory Stewart, she got ridiculed because she had made a fool of herself.
Stewart has rehabilitated himself by not making silly errors since. The problem with Abbott is she keeps messing up, and has done over many years, which doesn't exactly suggest she is the right person to be Shadow Home Secretary.
And before anyone accuses me of partisanship, racism, sexism, Old Uncle Tom Cobbleighism and all, two words - Michael Gove.0 -
0
