politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast. So Boris Johnson is PM. What
Comments
-
I certainly hope not. Jeremy would regain his lustre if he took a strong stand here.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
Let the middle classes send their own sons and daughters to die in the Baltic, if they feel so strongly about Estonia.
0 -
If you watch one, watch the one I linked to. Like BTCC third races (which have a reversed top ten cars, with wild card) it's rather exciting.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, I watched most of a race (think I stumbled across it when I had time to kill).
It was interesting but very little overtaking (hard to say if that was due to the circuit) and, of course, much slower than F1. I still think it's going to do more harm than good, though.
I'm intrigued how you think it'll do more harm than good. Some of the drivers in W series aren't that good, but the same can be said for normal F3. However three or four drivers do seem to be rather promising.0 -
If Staines apologised once, just once, for the numerous lies and false stories he has spread, not to mention the execrable Totty Watch which he used to post shortly before haranguing MPs for, errr, totty watching, then I'd look at him.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.
I'm sorry but I don't give him the time of day. If CC apologised for something great. Doesn't alter the fact that she has been right 90%+ of the time and Staines hasn't.0 -
Coastal elitistsHYUFD said:Cotswold is full of second homes for wealthy Londoners
0 -
Mr. Jessop, segregating women strongly implies they're not good enough to compete with men.0
-
Badoom-tish.Pulpstar said:
It's possible Corbyn could send troops but I think Putin will be able to manage on his own.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troopsTheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.0 -
She has made some classic errors and is only interested in leavers for some reason.Mysticrose said:
If Staines apologised once, just once, for the numerous lies and false stories he has spread, not to mention the execrable Totty Watch which he used to post shortly before haranguing MPs for, errr, totty watching, then I'd look at him.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.
I'm sorry but I don't give him the time of day. If CC apologised for something great. Doesn't alter the fact that she has been right 90%+ of the time and Staines hasn't.
But hey, she is in your camp so ignore all the baggage she carries with her.1 -
I think that is mistaken. It provides another route up the ladder, and talent will emerge.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, I watched most of a race (think I stumbled across it when I had time to kill).
It was interesting but very little overtaking (hard to say if that was due to the circuit) and, of course, much slower than F1. I still think it's going to do more harm than good, though.
Incidentally, don't take much notice of first practice today.
It's going to be 10 deg cooler on Saturday and Sunday - which is lucky for Mercedes as they have failed fully to solve their cooling problems.0 -
You do understand that NATO then falls apart right?YBarddCwsc said:
I certainly hope not. Jeremy would regain his lustre if he took a strong stand here.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
Let the middle classes send their own sons and daughters to die in the Baltic, if they feel so strongly about Estonia.1 -
Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
Sadly, I could see that.Pulpstar said:
It's possible Corbyn could send troops but I think Putin will be able to manage on his own.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troopsTheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.0 -
TBH reading Dura Aces posts previously it sounds like nobody would (may have been slightly different Eastern European country)AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:TheJezziah said:
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
I'd automatically lean towards no for military action generally but I'd be a bit less sure on the answer in a defensive situation which is an invasion of a European country in which other European countries were responding.
I'd probably go no depending on exact circumstances but do you think Putin would do that and prefer Corbyn for that reason over and above Boris and no deal. Putin has made some moves but seems like a potential overstep he would avoid whereas Boris Johnson and no deal contains no blowback for Russia.0 -
What does that have to do with anything? I wasnt defending Staines' record I was pointing out he was right about this particular issue. You dont seem to care if he was or not because hes been wrong himself.Mysticrose said:
If Staines apologised once, just once, for the numerous lies and false stories he has spread, not to mention the execrable Totty Watch which he used to post shortly before haranguing MPs for, errr, totty watching, then I'd look at him.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.
I'm sorry but I don't give him the time of day. If CC apologised for something great. Doesn't alter the fact that she has been right 90%+ of the time and Staines hasn't.
Thats just madness. If the report of her apology had come via the guardian the fact of it would be no different.
She was wrong, end of. You say that's great she apologised but you did not care if she was in the wrong as you decided to focus instead on Staines.
No one has to hold a neutral or positive position on media outlets and persons, on the contrary let's hate Guido or Novaro who ever, but proudly deciding there was no need to even worry about the facts because x is a shit is frankly bizarre and certainly allows no moral high ground. If the canary posted something true it could not be ignored just because of past wrongs .
And of course that applies to Staines - he should not ignore facts that come from people he dislikes.0 -
Translation : LA LA LA - not listeningMysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?0 -
Boris is the John Prescott of the Tories...kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
I refer back to my previous answers, Ken Clarke, and the best of them all was Alex Salmond now sadly out of politics. Mike Russel is not bad either and there is one of the Tory defectors that was not bad but cannot remember exactly , think Heidi something or other. Another absent one who was good was Angus Robertson.Cicero said:
Apart from the Nippy Sweetie and The Accused, is there anyone in politics you actually like Malc?malcolmg said:
Usual Horses arses faced Tory. Far too much inbreeding down there.AndyJS said:"Meet Carrie Symonds, The Most-Watched Woman In Westminster"
https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/who-is-carrie-symonds
Genuine question.
Dearth of talented politicians at present.0 -
He used to post regularly on here but stopped after leading many punters over the cliff during the Cash For Honours saga. I wasn't one of them but nevertheless I don't like what he did.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.
0 -
Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.0 -
Mr. B, agree entirely on the practice point (also, could well be rain over the weekend).
W Series does provide another route, for one gender. If it works, it's discriminatory (and, at some point, that has to be tackled in a mixed competition) and if it doesn't, it's pointless. A lot of female drivers were against the idea, either dead set, or reluctantly pro because they have to be for their own careers, whilst disagreeing with the principle.0 -
YBarddCwsc said:AlastairMeeks said:
We already have several hundred troops fully embedded in Estonia and an RAF squadron currently based in Estonia, so please keep up.TheJezziah said:
I certainly hope not. Jeremy would regain his lustre if he took a strong stand here.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
Let the middle classes send their own sons and daughters to die in the Baltic, if they feel so strongly about Estonia.
The UK also sent more ships to Estonia in 1918 than Port Stanley in 1982. It was one of our finest hours. The Kronstadt Raid was a magnificent navel feat.
The political relationship between the UK and Estonia is still absolutely solid, though the Estonians do not understand why the UK is deliberately undermining itself.0 -
I actually kind of agree with him on that point. I don't think he is an awful speaker, he can entertain, exactly but I dont think hes great and without accent privilege I think it would get short shrift.kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
What did he do?Peter_the_Punter said:
He used to post regularly on here but stopped after leading many punters over the cliff during the Cash For Honours saga. I wasn't one of them but nevertheless I don't like what he did.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.0 -
Its probably what would happen though. I dont think enough places would honour the commitment.Floater said:
You do understand that NATO then falls apart right?YBarddCwsc said:
I certainly hope not. Jeremy would regain his lustre if he took a strong stand here.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
Let the middle classes send their own sons and daughters to die in the Baltic, if they feel so strongly about Estonia.0 -
He’s only just found out Britain is an island off the coast of France.Foxy said:@SouthamObserver
While I share your low opinion of most of the cabinet, particularly Williamson and Patel, Raab at the FCO is a different kettle of fish. He has years of experience working at the FCO in the New Labour era, indeed a CV which suits a SJW, including human rights activism, working for the ICC, Liberty and even Palestinian government. From Wikipedia:
"After leaving Cambridge, Raab worked at Linklaters in London, completing his two-year training contract at the firm and then leaving shortly after qualifying as a solicitor in 2000. Whilst at Linklaters he worked on project finance, international litigation and competition law. This included time on secondments at Liberty (the human rights NGO) and in Brussels advising on EU and WTO law.[15][third-party source needed] He spent the summer of 1998 at Birzeit University near Ramallah, Palestine's de facto capital on the West Bank, where he worked for one of the principal Palestinian negotiators of the Oslo peace accords, assessing World Bank projects on the West Bank.
Raab joined the Foreign Office in 2000, covering a range of briefs including leading a team at the British Embassy in The Hague, dedicated to bringing war criminals to justice. After returning to London, he advised on the Arab–Israeli conflict, the European Union, and Gibraltar. "
0 -
Is that correct? Dennis Skinner comes to mind as a non posh comparison.kle4 said:
I actually kind of agree with him on that point. I don't think he is an awful speaker, he can entertain, exactly but I dont think hes great and without accent privilege I think it would get short shrift.kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO0 -
It seems that nostalgia for the Soviet Union isn't limited to certain cliques in the Labour party. Putin isn't a communist except in a psychologically formative sense, he's an enthusiastic and unscrupulous exponents of Russian power & influence in a long tradition that predates and will long outlive the C20th 'experiment'. He would welcome Corbyn for almost exactly the same reasons as he'd welcomes BJ (& Trump, Salvini, Bolsanaro etc), a chaotic and weakened West. The idea that there's some sort of ideological affinity between V.V.Putin and J.B.Corbyn is for the birds.Endillion said:
I'll put you down as "cautiously optimistic" about Johnson's premiership.AlastairMeeks said:
Only one thing matters to Boris Johnson and that's Boris Johnson. Everything else will be thrown to the wolves sooner or later.Endillion said:
Yes, I take your point. Although I think Johnson's plan (to the extent he has one - maybe "vague aim" would be better) is for close cooperation with the EU on matters that are important to us both - he's certainly not a Cash/Redwood type radical on the subject of Europe.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
Otherwise, Johnson tends to be socially quite liberal and economically right wing. Pretty much the polar opposite of the authoritarian, socially conservative Putin.
Vladimir Putin won't be very interested in Boris Johnson's views anyway. He's just a useful tool.
My original point (which you've now made also) was that Corbyn as PM would be a fantastic result for Putin. Maybe I shouldn't post at 5am - it seems I get carried away a bit.0 -
Of course NATO membership and the obligation to commit HMF to a joint military operation is one absence of sovereignty that leavers are very happy to accept.kle4 said:Its probably what would happen though. I dont think enough places would honour the commitment.
But at least it's not something important, such as banana curvature.0 -
At what point would you act to stop russian tanks. The baltic, poland, Paris?TheJezziah said:
TBH reading Dura Aces posts previously it sounds like nobody would (may have been slightly different Eastern European country)AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:TheJezziah said:
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
I'd automatically lean towards no for military action generally but I'd be a bit less sure on the answer in a defensive situation which is an invasion of a European country in which other European countries were responding.
I'd probably go no depending on exact circumstances but do you think Putin would do that and prefer Corbyn for that reason over and above Boris and no deal. Putin has made some moves but seems like a potential overstep he would avoid whereas Boris Johnson and no deal contains no blowback for Russia.0 -
It is Conservative governments that have cut the army, navy and air force, as well as fiddling the paperwork to make it look as if we still meet the 2% target (George Osborne started counting pensions). If he had a vote, Putin would vote Tory, not Labour, to weaken NATO and British defence.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
0 -
With no Bambi as an ameliorating presence.Foxy said:
Boris is the John Prescott of the Tories...kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
Don’t think Paul Staines has won many Pulitzer Prizes. Unsurprisingly, since he runs a sewer.Floater said:
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO1 -
What counts as abuse? Being wrong about small things can be important if it happens enough as it undermines being right about the big things. Many would say the reverse happens too in being right about small things can distract about being wrong on the big thingsGardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
I personally welcome any journalist or politician who is factually wrong having that pointed out. Its good for them as well as us as hopefully they learn from it.0 -
Again someone sourcing Paul Staines.Floater said:
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO
Listen, he's not a proper journalist. He posts scurrilous rumours, many of which are wrong and he's rabidly right-wing. And he hides behind it all by registering off-shore in Ireland.0 -
There will be exceptions, and granted it is only my impression I dont have anything to back it up, but I just dont think someone with a west county drawl or thick liverpudlian accent would get praised for using the same style as Boris.kjh said:
Is that correct? Dennis Skinner comes to mind as a non posh comparison.kle4 said:
I actually kind of agree with him on that point. I don't think he is an awful speaker, he can entertain, exactly but I dont think hes great and without accent privilege I think it would get short shrift.kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/11543483138414182400 -
But that assumes a level playing field. As I and others have told you repeatedly, the playing field is far from level.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, segregating women strongly implies they're not good enough to compete with men.
There's two positions to take: you can say that women are incapable of having the same racing skills as men, and that's why they haven't progressed. Or you can say they can have the same skills, as there are other reasons they're not progressing.
I'm firmly in the latter camp. And we need more than a token one or two women competing with men in various formula; we need several to avoid the Danica Patrick effect.
And they can compete. for instance, the current W-series leader, Jamie Chadwick, is the first woman to win a F3 race against men, and was the youngest ever winner, and the first female winner, of the British GT championship. But there's far too few of them getting to that level because of barriers placed in their way. Chadwick avoided some of those because she has a fairly rich family, and an elder brother who was racing before her.
As another example, see Hallie Deegan in Nascar.1 -
I won an election fair and square
You cheated your way to victory
He is influenced by fake news
We are righteous
They didn't know what they were voting for0 -
Islington, just before they hit Upper Street.Slackbladder said:
At what point would you act to stop russian tanks. The baltic, poland, Paris?TheJezziah said:
TBH reading Dura Aces posts previously it sounds like nobody would (may have been slightly different Eastern European country)AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:TheJezziah said:
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
I'd automatically lean towards no for military action generally but I'd be a bit less sure on the answer in a defensive situation which is an invasion of a European country in which other European countries were responding.
I'd probably go no depending on exact circumstances but do you think Putin would do that and prefer Corbyn for that reason over and above Boris and no deal. Putin has made some moves but seems like a potential overstep he would avoid whereas Boris Johnson and no deal contains no blowback for Russia.0 -
There seems to be an entire industry of trolls who refer to Carole as a sad cat lady / bag lady, suggest she is mentally ill, even suggest physical violence etc. Many emanate from the “Leave.EU” group, ie Aaron Banks.kle4 said:
What counts as abuse? Being wrong about small things can be important if it happens enough as it undermines being right about the big things. Many would say the reverse happens too in being right about small things can distract about being wrong on the big thingsGardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
I personally welcome any journalist or politician who is factually wrong having that pointed out. Its good for them as well as us as hopefully they learn from it.0 -
I don't know if I've ever really read anything by her. But I don't read Paul Staines either.Floater said:
She has made some classic errors and is only interested in leavers for some reason.Mysticrose said:
If Staines apologised once, just once, for the numerous lies and false stories he has spread, not to mention the execrable Totty Watch which he used to post shortly before haranguing MPs for, errr, totty watching, then I'd look at him.kle4 said:
But she apologised. Whatever one thinks of Staines, who obviously is no objective source, her apology shows she was wrong. Ignoring her own apology because of Staines seems a peculiar thing to do. You aren't ignoring what he says, you're ignoring what she said.Mysticrose said:
I don't know. Staines has been completely wrong about her so many times I no longer read him. And I don't take any note of what he says. He's descended into a nasty rabid right-wing thug who pedals half-baked stories.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well codswallop has had to apologize yet again, so in this case it appears he is correct.Mysticrose said:tlg86 said:I see Carole Codswallop was spreading fake news again last night:
https://order-order.com/2019/07/26/caroles-cadwalladrs-latest-miscarriage-justice/
You're turning to Paul Staines for reputable journalism?
Even people we dislike or who are awful can occasionally be right.
I'm sorry but I don't give him the time of day. If CC apologised for something great. Doesn't alter the fact that she has been right 90%+ of the time and Staines hasn't.
But hey, she is in your camp so ignore all the baggage she carries with her.
I stick to reputable journalism with the checks and balances.
Everyone gets things wrong. Saying sorry is a massive plus in my book. I might start looking at her material on that basis alone.
Obvs if you keep making mistakes, that's a different matter.
But Paul Staines? I don't now touch his gutter-writing.
Let's move on ...0 -
Personally I am okay with supporting countries against another countries invasion depending on the circumstances. The problem, and I suspect Corbyn's problem is we also encourage aggression and opposition rather than just friendliness and cooperation.Slackbladder said:
At what point would you act to stop russian tanks. The baltic, poland, Paris?TheJezziah said:
TBH reading Dura Aces posts previously it sounds like nobody would (may have been slightly different Eastern European country)AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:TheJezziah said:
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
I'd automatically lean towards no for military action generally but I'd be a bit less sure on the answer in a defensive situation which is an invasion of a European country in which other European countries were responding.
I'd probably go no depending on exact circumstances but do you think Putin would do that and prefer Corbyn for that reason over and above Boris and no deal. Putin has made some moves but seems like a potential overstep he would avoid whereas Boris Johnson and no deal contains no blowback for Russia.0 -
Yes, she is clearly a hate figure and that is a relevant thing to bear in mind. It has no bearing however when she admits the error. Hopefully next time she will be more cautious in checking details and will therefore be in a position to hold the high ground in an argument about facts with her hate figures. Lord knows internet hate mongers dont deserve to be right.Gardenwalker said:
There seems to be an entire industry of trolls who refer to Carole as a sad cat lady / bag lady, suggest she is mentally ill, even suggest physical violence etc. Many emanate from the “Vote Leave” group.kle4 said:
What counts as abuse? Being wrong about small things can be important if it happens enough as it undermines being right about the big things. Many would say the reverse happens too in being right about small things can distract about being wrong on the big thingsGardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
I personally welcome any journalist or politician who is factually wrong having that pointed out. Its good for them as well as us as hopefully they learn from it.0 -
Romania & Australia should be included surely?Slackbladder said:
At what point would you act to stop russian tanks. The baltic, poland, Paris?TheJezziah said:
TBH reading Dura Aces posts previously it sounds like nobody would (may have been slightly different Eastern European country)AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:TheJezziah said:
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
I'd automatically lean towards no for military action generally but I'd be a bit less sure on the answer in a defensive situation which is an invasion of a European country in which other European countries were responding.
I'd probably go no depending on exact circumstances but do you think Putin would do that and prefer Corbyn for that reason over and above Boris and no deal. Putin has made some moves but seems like a potential overstep he would avoid whereas Boris Johnson and no deal contains no blowback for Russia.
0 -
Mr. Jessop, perhaps. We'll see what happens.0
-
I'd differentiate between the comments - which are too often hateful, illiterate bilge - and the articles on Guido. Although they can be very, very partisan, the *facts* within them are usually pretty robust.Gardenwalker said:
Don’t think Paul Staines has won many Pulitzer Prizes. Unsurprisingly, since he runs a sewer.Floater said:
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO
That level of partisanship is not my style, and certainly not my viewpoint, but it's more reliable factually than some on the other side in my experience.0 -
Sewers are very useful things.Gardenwalker said:
Don’t think Paul Staines has won many Pulitzer Prizes. Unsurprisingly, since he runs a sewer.Floater said:
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO
The building of sanitation was a major milestone in public health and increasing life expectancy.
0 -
Sure, but I wouldn’t want to live in one.YBarddCwsc said:
Sewers are very useful things.Gardenwalker said:
Don’t think Paul Staines has won many Pulitzer Prizes. Unsurprisingly, since he runs a sewer.Floater said:
https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/Gardenwalker said:Carole Cadwalladr gets a lot of abuse, even from some of the less usual suspects on here.
It’s a pretty poor show in my opinion.
She is wrong, too often, about the small details, but right about the big thing: that Cambridge Analytica weaponised illegally and unethically obtained social media data, quite possibly with the full connivance of Facebook, to support the Brexit and Trump campaigns.
Basically, the hyper-targeting of “fake news”.
Only yesterday it emerged that Facebook actually sold CA such data whereas previously they had claimed that CA were using it illicitly.
"small details"
LMAO
The building of sanitation was a major milestone in public health and increasing life expectancy.0 -
... or blue passports.TOPPING said:
Of course NATO membership and the obligation to commit HMF to a joint military operation is one absence of sovereignty that leavers are very happy to accept.kle4 said:Its probably what would happen though. I dont think enough places would honour the commitment.
But at least it's not something important, such as banana curvature.0 -
I probably agree with you. He just popped into my mind when I read it and couldn't resist postingkle4 said:
There will be exceptions, and granted it is only my impression I dont have anything to back it up, but I just dont think someone with a west county drawl or thick liverpudlian accent would get praised for using the same style as Boris.kjh said:
Is that correct? Dennis Skinner comes to mind as a non posh comparison.kle4 said:
I actually kind of agree with him on that point. I don't think he is an awful speaker, he can entertain, exactly but I dont think hes great and without accent privilege I think it would get short shrift.kinabalu said:Something that has often struck me. The deference to privilege is still there in our DNA.
We think we're so clever and classless and free. But we're still ...
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1154348313841418240
And huge apologies but I just 'Off Topic' you because I can't use a mouse competently.0 -
Both amusing, and a fit commentary on Anglo-American politics since 2016:
https://twitter.com/lucdebarochez/status/1154102185879384064?s=210 -
We would be - at a stretch - sixth in the world in battery technology, behind: South Korea, USA, Japan, China, and France.Nigelb said:
Mainly bluster.DecrepitJohnL said:New Scientist has a look at what Boris said about science and technology in his opening statement.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2211206-awkward-truths-about-boris-johnsons-praise-for-uk-science-and-tech/
The idea that we 'lead the world' in battery technology is utterly risible.0 -
Do we know what Shapps view of HS2 is?0
-
Both the Gloucester wards the Lib Dems won last night voted Leave.0
-
https://twitter.com/ChukaUmunna/status/1154655924604350464?s=20
I tend to agree with Chuka.
I think I'd also be careful if I was Clive Lewis chucking those particular rocks... because if I was James Cleverly, I'd lob it straight back with a reference to pots and kettles.0 -
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.0 -
It already has.Floater said:
You do understand that NATO then falls apart right?YBarddCwsc said:
I certainly hope not. Jeremy would regain his lustre if he took a strong stand here.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?TheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
Let the middle classes send their own sons and daughters to die in the Baltic, if they feel so strongly about Estonia.
Just as banking is based on the illusion that depositors money is actually available for withdrawal, NATO is based upon the illusion that members will come to the defence of another member if attacked.
While money is available if *some* depositors wish to withdraw; co-defenders are only available if *some* countries are attacked by *some* aggressors.
Trump blew the illusion. Once blown it is near impossible to re-create.0 -
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
0 -
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops
0 -
Sixth in technology for the sixth largest economy seems reasonable. Though we could seek to do better.rcs1000 said:
We would be - at a stretch - sixth in the world in battery technology, behind: South Korea, USA, Japan, China, and France.Nigelb said:
Mainly bluster.DecrepitJohnL said:New Scientist has a look at what Boris said about science and technology in his opening statement.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2211206-awkward-truths-about-boris-johnsons-praise-for-uk-science-and-tech/
The idea that we 'lead the world' in battery technology is utterly risible.
0 -
Actually it'd be quite interesting to have a poll on here of where people get most of their news? I mean, really, a proper poll rather than just in the comments section. I wonder if one of the leaders could organise such a thing?
For me I go something like this:
1 = in no particular order:
Sky News online
BBC News online
Politicalbetting
then:
4. Twitter, with infinite caution
5. TheTimes online
6. The Telegraph online
7. Mailonline
8. Guardian online
9. Facebook
It might surprise some to see me put pb up so high, but I do. Threads are normally well researched and, effectively, peer-reviewed. It has a diverse cross-section of political opinion amongst posters. And whilst I find the likes of HYUFD and Phillip Thomson often irritating, they represent an important (they might say THE most important) section of the country. For the most part discussions avoid tetchiness, people are sometimes able to apologise, and even to see other people's points of view. The latter is the best part of all. I think the fact that a lot of us bet, you know put our money where our mouths are, means we think with our heads. Rather than our partisan bias.0 -
If they didn’t want to defend the Baltic states they should never have admitted them.Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
Eh? How does that work as a deterrence then?Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
For Bozo fans don’t despair I’m sure the Telegraph will come up with a Bozo bounce headline for the weekend .
I’d be a bit surprised if he didn’t see a poll boost given the fawning media coverage .0 -
And Sweden.rcs1000 said:
We would be - at a stretch - sixth in the world in battery technology, behind: South Korea, USA, Japan, China, and France.Nigelb said:
Mainly bluster.DecrepitJohnL said:New Scientist has a look at what Boris said about science and technology in his opening statement.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2211206-awkward-truths-about-boris-johnsons-praise-for-uk-science-and-tech/
The idea that we 'lead the world' in battery technology is utterly risible.
0 -
Action on social care? I will believe when I see it. They have been talking about this for 20 years:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7287651/Boris-Johnson-gives-Jeremy-Corbyn-ultimatum-cross-party-deal-fix-dementia-care-crisis.html0 -
On the same basis as our nuclear deterrent I'd imagine, outcome armageddon hasn't happened yet so this thing stuck together with spit, gaffer tape and faith must be working.rottenborough said:
Eh? How does that work as a deterrence then?Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
williamglenn said:
Both the Gloucester wards the Lib Dems won last night voted Leave.
Bloody hell0 -
Total bollocks.Mysticrose said:Actually it'd be quite interesting to have a poll on here of where people get most of their news? I mean, really, a proper poll rather than just in the comments section. I wonder if one of the leaders could organise such a thing?
For me I go something like this:
1 = in no particular order:
Sky News online
BBC News online
Politicalbetting
then:
4. Twitter, with infinite caution
5. TheTimes online
6. The Telegraph online
7. Mailonline
8. Guardian online
9. Facebook
It might surprise some to see me put pb up so high, but I do. Threads are normally well researched and, effectively, peer-reviewed. It has a diverse cross-section of political opinion amongst posters. And whilst I find the likes of HYUFD and Phillip Thomson often irritating, they represent an important (they might say THE most important) section of the country. For the most part discussions avoid tetchiness, people are sometimes able to apologise, and even to see other people's points of view. The latter is the best part of all. I think the fact that a lot of us bet, you know put our money where our mouths are, means we think with our heads. Rather than our partisan bias.
Edit: kidding - for up to the minute (political) news there is no better resource than PB.0 -
Probably not that well in the long term. Do you think the British public and government have the stomach to take hundreds of KIAs every day fighting for fucking Estonia? Because I don't. I was in Basra and the mission there just became don't do anything that might risk casualties and uncomfortable headlines.rottenborough said:
Eh? How does that work as a deterrence then?Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
On election nights PB is definitely the Number One source of information. Way better than BBC, Sky, ITV and Babestation.Mysticrose said:Actually it'd be quite interesting to have a poll on here of where people get most of their news? I mean, really, a proper poll rather than just in the comments section. I wonder if one of the leaders could organise such a thing?
For me I go something like this:
1 = in no particular order:
Sky News online
BBC News online
Politicalbetting
then:
4. Twitter, with infinite caution
5. TheTimes online
6. The Telegraph online
7. Mailonline
8. Guardian online
9. Facebook
It might surprise some to see me put pb up so high, but I do. Threads are normally well researched and, effectively, peer-reviewed. It has a diverse cross-section of political opinion amongst posters. And whilst I find the likes of HYUFD and Phillip Thomson often irritating, they represent an important (they might say THE most important) section of the country. For the most part discussions avoid tetchiness, people are sometimes able to apologise, and even to see other people's points of view. The latter is the best part of all. I think the fact that a lot of us bet, you know put our money where our mouths are, means we think with our heads. Rather than our partisan bias.0 -
It's too early to tell if he has a polling boost yet - remember most people don't consume news first hand, it is post event coverage upon which switchers normally rely.nico67 said:For Bozo fans don’t despair I’m sure the Telegraph will come up with a Bozo bounce headline for the weekend .
I’d be a bit surprised if he didn’t see a poll boost given the fawning media coverage .0 -
rottenborough said:
Do we know what Shapps view of HS2 is?
He's constantly moaning on twitter about the trains0 -
Accusing politicians of only being interested in their own power is a dog bites man statement. But other politicians do have core principles, whether you agree with them or not. May has; Corbyn has; Cameron has some, albeit very woolly. Even Farage has a couple of small ones hidden away.AlastairMeeks said:
Only one thing matters to Boris Johnson and that's Boris Johnson. Everything else will be thrown to the wolves sooner or later.Endillion said:
Yes, I take your point. Although I think Johnson's plan (to the extent he has one - maybe "vague aim" would be better) is for close cooperation with the EU on matters that are important to us both - he's certainly not a Cash/Redwood type radical on the subject of Europe.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
Otherwise, Johnson tends to be socially quite liberal and economically right wing. Pretty much the polar opposite of the authoritarian, socially conservative Putin.
Vladimir Putin won't be very interested in Boris Johnson's views anyway. He's just a useful tool.
Johnson genuinely has no principles at all. His opponents really need to push that point.0 -
Sky news twitter feed has been very good in the last couple too.SandyRentool said:
On election nights PB is definitely the Number One source of information. Way better than BBC, Sky, ITV and Babestation.Mysticrose said:Actually it'd be quite interesting to have a poll on here of where people get most of their news? I mean, really, a proper poll rather than just in the comments section. I wonder if one of the leaders could organise such a thing?
For me I go something like this:
1 = in no particular order:
Sky News online
BBC News online
Politicalbetting
then:
4. Twitter, with infinite caution
5. TheTimes online
6. The Telegraph online
7. Mailonline
8. Guardian online
9. Facebook
It might surprise some to see me put pb up so high, but I do. Threads are normally well researched and, effectively, peer-reviewed. It has a diverse cross-section of political opinion amongst posters. And whilst I find the likes of HYUFD and Phillip Thomson often irritating, they represent an important (they might say THE most important) section of the country. For the most part discussions avoid tetchiness, people are sometimes able to apologise, and even to see other people's points of view. The latter is the best part of all. I think the fact that a lot of us bet, you know put our money where our mouths are, means we think with our heads. Rather than our partisan bias.0 -
The decision to go military, is not itself a military decision, as Clemenceau observed. So you don't have privileged insight on the point, to which the correct answer is: God only knows, it would depend on the circumstances.Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
Against Cameron and Blair, Jo Swinson would probably have disappeared without trace in a crowded middle ground.YBarddCwsc said:
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
Against Corbyn and Johnson, the bar is fairly low to attract a pretty big swathe of the uncommitted from the centrist wings of both parties. I don't think there'll be a massive move of activists or elected representatives. But voters?0 -
Although for people fed up with one set of principles or another, having none might be seen, or spun, as an advantage because it will be put forward as unideological.FF43 said:
Accusing politicians of only being interested in their own power is a dog bites man statement. But other politicians do have core principles, whether you agree with them or not. May has; Corbyn has; Cameron has some, albeit very woolly. Even Farage has a couple of small ones hidden away.AlastairMeeks said:
Only one thing matters to Boris Johnson and that's Boris Johnson. Everything else will be thrown to the wolves sooner or later.Endillion said:
Yes, I take your point. Although I think Johnson's plan (to the extent he has one - maybe "vague aim" would be better) is for close cooperation with the EU on matters that are important to us both - he's certainly not a Cash/Redwood type radical on the subject of Europe.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
Otherwise, Johnson tends to be socially quite liberal and economically right wing. Pretty much the polar opposite of the authoritarian, socially conservative Putin.
Vladimir Putin won't be very interested in Boris Johnson's views anyway. He's just a useful tool.
Johnson genuinely has no principles at all. His opponents really need to push that point.0 -
Probably a little harsh of me to say this but Prescott IMO was the Uncle Tom blue collar token who provided New Labour with a riposte to the charge of forgetting their roots.Foxy said:Boris is the John Prescott of the Tories...
He was relentlessly patronized but did not seem to mind because he bought into the trade and it brought him influence and worldly goods.
I agree there is a parallel with Johnson. But it's real class privilege versus reverse tokenism.
Plenty of the latter (albeit BAME not class) in Johnson's cabinet as it happens.0 -
I know it's bad, but every time I see this pic I'm getting the Looney Toons theme sequence in my head. I reassure myself it *is* only the background (as per https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91gOCgWhHJL._SX300_.jpg)
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1154672704789909505?s=200 -
I will be voting Lib Dem next time round simply because they are NOT Johnson or Corbyn (notice I do not say Tories or Labour. The parties may exist, but the cults are in control)Harris_Tweed said:
Against Cameron and Blair, Jo Swinson would probably have disappeared without trace in a crowded middle ground.YBarddCwsc said:
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
Against Corbyn and Johnson, the bar is fairly low to attract a pretty big swathe of the uncommitted from the centrist wings of both parties. I don't think there'll be a massive move of activists or elected representatives. But voters?0 -
For Firefox, enter "about:config" in the address bar (without the quotes) and hit Enter. Click on the button to accept the risk. Scroll down to security.csp.enable and double click on it so that the right hand column reads "false". This makes you less secure so use at your own risk.Roger said:
I can't understand much of your conversation with Edmund but I can't access any of the comments on Firefox though everything else seems normal. I'm having to access them on Chrome which is more difficult. Can either of you lend a solution?prh47bridge said:
Looking at those headers and doing some digging, the policy is not being made up by Chrome. The response from Vanilla that contains the comments has a header which includes the directive "Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors 'self' www2.politicalbetting.com *politicalbetting.com". That tells the browser that it should only embed the comments in a page from the same source as the comments (i.e. politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com) or from any domain ending politicalbetting.com. The www2.politicalbetting.com bit of the directive is actually redundant because that will also match *politicalbetting.com. So it appears that Chrome thinks the main page is not from politicalbetting.com but from some other domain. Strange.edmundintokyo said:
These are the errors I'm getting - apparently Chrome is applying a content security policy and thinks it's not allowed to load the iframe from vanilla, but I can't see anything in the headers or the source code that sets that, so I guess it's just a setting that Chrome made up.edmundintokyo said:I've got something similar here, not working in Chrome, although Firefox is OK. Been this way for a week or two.
I can still see the embedded tweets in Firefox, though.
https://pastebin.com/zxAf0p1h
Anyone having difficulties on Chrome could try this plugin - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/disable-content-security/ieelmcmcagommplceebfedjlakkhpden?hl=en
Disclaimer: I've not tested it, the reviews are mixed and it makes you less secure, so use at your own risk.
Other options: Use Edge which seems quite happy with the current settings or wait for Vanilla to fix it.0 -
Fixed it for you...AlastairMeeks said:If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would could send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?
1 -
Huge insult to those people that you think they are only there as tokens. Sajid you think is just tokenism?kinabalu said:
Probably a little harsh of me to say this but Prescott IMO was the Uncle Tom blue collar token who provided New Labour with a riposte to the charge of forgetting their roots.Foxy said:Boris is the John Prescott of the Tories...
He was relentlessly patronized but did not seem to mind because he bought into the trade and it brought him influence and worldly goods.
I agree there is a parallel with Johnson. But it's real class privilege versus reverse tokenism.
Plenty of the latter (albeit BAME not class) in Johnson's cabinet as it happens.
Take a look at yourself.0 -
Hi Beverley. As a (new?) Lib Dem voter, what do you make of Jo Swinson? Would Ed Davey have been better?Beibheirli_C said:
I will be voting Lib Dem next time round simply because they are NOT Johnson or Corbyn (notice I do not say Tories or Labour. The parties may exist, but the cults are in control)Harris_Tweed said:
Against Cameron and Blair, Jo Swinson would probably have disappeared without trace in a crowded middle ground.YBarddCwsc said:
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
Against Corbyn and Johnson, the bar is fairly low to attract a pretty big swathe of the uncommitted from the centrist wings of both parties. I don't think there'll be a massive move of activists or elected representatives. But voters?0 -
Hot air.Harris_Tweed said:I know it's bad, but every time I see this pic I'm getting the Looney Toons theme sequence in my head. I reassure myself it *is* only the background (as per https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91gOCgWhHJL._SX300_.jpg)
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1154672704789909505?s=200 -
I think she needs a voice coach. As someone said, she sounds too like Vicky Pollard. Having listened to Swinson speaking, I agree.Harris_Tweed said:
Against Cameron and Blair, Jo Swinson would probably have disappeared without trace in a crowded middle ground.YBarddCwsc said:
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
Against Corbyn and Johnson, the bar is fairly low to attract a pretty big swathe of the uncommitted from the centrist wings of both parties. I don't think there'll be a massive move of activists or elected representatives. But voters?
Throughout her time, May's voice rarely seemed to be too strident. On that small point, she got it right.0 -
Of course it couldn’t. The widows pensions alone would cripple the Treasury.Beibheirli_C said:
Fixed it for you...AlastairMeeks said:If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would could send troops to honour its NATO Article 5 obligations?
0 -
Exactly - NATO would be finished if they didn't defend a member from invasion.StuartDickson said:
If they didn’t want to defend the Baltic states they should never have admitted them.Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
LOLPulpstar said:
It's possible Corbyn could send troops but I think Putin will be able to manage on his own.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troopsTheJezziah said:
TBH Corbyn will probably have little effect, even if he won a big majority I couldn't see him leaving NATO, I'm not sure it is a huge priority of his.AlastairMeeks said:
Jeremy Corbyn would be a top pick for Vladimir Putin too. The destruction of NATO is a strategic objective and he'd effectively achieve it then without a shot being fired.TheJezziah said:
It is almost a struggle to come up with two better picks than Boris and Trump, Farage maybe, but from a Putin perspective those 2 and their policies are almost perfect.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
It isn't for nothing that Putin seems to go for populist right wing Eurosceptic parties, the pattern repeats over a few countries.
Whereas no deal clearly is on the Boris agenda.
Given the choice in an upcoming election Putin would almost undoubtedly favour Boris and his no deal platform winning.
0 -
Rather surreal on Sky right now: Peter Bone as a cheerleader for the government.0
-
Modern democracies fighting wars is an issue unless clear and present case e.g. Falklands.Dura_Ace said:
Probably not that well in the long term. Do you think the British public and government have the stomach to take hundreds of KIAs every day fighting for fucking Estonia? Because I don't. I was in Basra and the mission there just became don't do anything that might risk casualties and uncomfortable headlines.rottenborough said:
Eh? How does that work as a deterrence then?Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops
Mind you, whether we go in or not will be irrelevant as Trump certainly wouldn't and that would be the end of NATO overnight I suspect. Pretty sure NATO wont last his second term.0 -
If Vanilla is causing the problems, Vanilla can fix the problems.prh47bridge said:
For Firefox, enter "about:config" in the address bar (without the quotes) and hit Enter. Click on the button to accept the risk. Scroll down to security.csp.enable and double click on it so that the right hand column reads "false". This makes you less secure so use at your own risk.Roger said:
I can't understand much of your conversation with Edmund but I can't access any of the comments on Firefox though everything else seems normal. I'm having to access them on Chrome which is more difficult. Can either of you lend a solution?prh47bridge said:
Looking at those headers and doing some digging, the policy is not being made up by Chrome. The response from Vanilla that contains the comments has a header which includes the directive "Content-Security-Policy: frame-ancestors 'self' www2.politicalbetting.com *politicalbetting.com". That tells the browser that it should only embed the comments in a page from the same source as the comments (i.e. politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com) or from any domain ending politicalbetting.com. The www2.politicalbetting.com bit of the directive is actually redundant because that will also match *politicalbetting.com. So it appears that Chrome thinks the main page is not from politicalbetting.com but from some other domain. Strange.edmundintokyo said:
These are the errors I'm getting - apparently Chrome is applying a content security policy and thinks it's not allowed to load the iframe from vanilla, but I can't see anything in the headers or the source code that sets that, so I guess it's just a setting that Chrome made up.edmundintokyo said:I've got something similar here, not working in Chrome, although Firefox is OK. Been this way for a week or two.
I can still see the embedded tweets in Firefox, though.
https://pastebin.com/zxAf0p1h
Anyone having difficulties on Chrome could try this plugin - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/disable-content-security/ieelmcmcagommplceebfedjlakkhpden?hl=en
Disclaimer: I've not tested it, the reviews are mixed and it makes you less secure, so use at your own risk.
Other options: Use Edge which seems quite happy with the current settings or wait for Vanilla to fix it.
I realise we are basket-case politics geeks, but don’t expect us to transmogrify into tech geeks too.0 -
I have no opinion on either of them. My support is tactical rather than ideological. They appear to be the least worst option at the moment.StuartDickson said:
Hi Beverley. As a (new?) Lib Dem voter, what do you make of Jo Swinson? Would Ed Davey have been better?Beibheirli_C said:
I will be voting Lib Dem next time round simply because they are NOT Johnson or Corbyn (notice I do not say Tories or Labour. The parties may exist, but the cults are in control)Harris_Tweed said:
Against Cameron and Blair, Jo Swinson would probably have disappeared without trace in a crowded middle ground.YBarddCwsc said:
Possibly. I'd be cautious, as Swinson has had little public scrutiny yet.OllyT said:
For many people like me not being Corbyn and not being Johnson is enough.The old duopoly couldn't really have done any more to help a LibDem revival and as we saw last night in the 2 Gloucester by elections they can take take seats and votes of either side.MattW said:
Not sure where Swinson is going to end up.Gallowgate said:
The first speech as leader was very shouty about "inclusive", but she did seem to exclude a lot of people. Very tribal.
And she has a bit of a history of going Missing in Action when awkward questions arise - not possible for a leader.
And of course Layla Moran is still in post.
The little I have seen suggests that (putting it most charitably) she has a very steep learning curve to surmount if there is a GE in the Autumn.
Against Corbyn and Johnson, the bar is fairly low to attract a pretty big swathe of the uncommitted from the centrist wings of both parties. I don't think there'll be a massive move of activists or elected representatives. But voters?1 -
Of course, battery technology covers a wide variety of things. Germany is not a leader in making batteries, but I'd reckon 99+% of the efficient high voltage charging systems in the world use Infineon power seminconductors.StuartDickson said:
And Sweden.rcs1000 said:
We would be - at a stretch - sixth in the world in battery technology, behind: South Korea, USA, Japan, China, and France.Nigelb said:
Mainly bluster.DecrepitJohnL said:New Scientist has a look at what Boris said about science and technology in his opening statement.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2211206-awkward-truths-about-boris-johnsons-praise-for-uk-science-and-tech/
The idea that we 'lead the world' in battery technology is utterly risible.
Remind me, what is Sweden's edge?0 -
This is the point. If every election, every poll, every forecast and every opinion is couched and biased solely by how people voted in one referendum three and a half years ago, we're going to get nowhere slowly.Mysticrose said:
Bloody hellwilliamglenn said:Both the Gloucester wards the Lib Dems won last night voted Leave.
The world has moved on, we have moved on, Westminster and those who operate there haven't. Everything comes back to that one vote on that one day but politics isn't static or stagnant and neither is opinion.
0 -
There are a lot of 'gloomsters and doomsters' on PB this morning! I wasn't a Boris fan but nobody I liked for the leadership could have given that commons performance. He's doing well so far.0
-
I always thought the way it worked was that by risking hundred of casualties in Talinn, we avoid tens of thousands of casualties in Berlin.Dura_Ace said:
Probably not that well in the long term. Do you think the British public and government have the stomach to take hundreds of KIAs every day fighting for fucking Estonia? Because I don't. I was in Basra and the mission there just became don't do anything that might risk casualties and uncomfortable headlines.rottenborough said:
Eh? How does that work as a deterrence then?Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
I wonder who he thinks Boris is going to negotiate with? AIUI, the EU Team is disbanded. Gone. Exit stage left pursued by a Johnsonrottenborough said:
Hot air.Harris_Tweed said:I know it's bad, but every time I see this pic I'm getting the Looney Toons theme sequence in my head. I reassure myself it *is* only the background (as per https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/91gOCgWhHJL._SX300_.jpg)
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1154672704789909505?s=20 0 -
NATO can impose a cost on the Russians for doing so. Trump, Brexit and, in a small way Johnson, make that threat less convincing. Which is why Putin aids all three.Floater said:
Exactly - NATO would be finished if they didn't defend a member from invasion.StuartDickson said:
If they didn’t want to defend the Baltic states they should never have admitted them.Dura_Ace said:
The Baltic membership of NATO is for deterrence purposes only. If that deterrent fails no NATO member is going to fight the Russian army through the streets of Tallinn no matter who the PM is.AlastairMeeks said:
If, say, Estonia is invaded by Russia at a time when Britain's Prime Minister is Jeremy Corbyn, do you think Britain would send troops0 -
It is his key strength, and his key weakness.FF43 said:
Accusing politicians of only being interested in their own power is a dog bites man statement. But other politicians do have core principles, whether you agree with them or not. May has; Corbyn has; Cameron has some, albeit very woolly. Even Farage has a couple of small ones hidden away.AlastairMeeks said:
Only one thing matters to Boris Johnson and that's Boris Johnson. Everything else will be thrown to the wolves sooner or later.Endillion said:
Yes, I take your point. Although I think Johnson's plan (to the extent he has one - maybe "vague aim" would be better) is for close cooperation with the EU on matters that are important to us both - he's certainly not a Cash/Redwood type radical on the subject of Europe.AlastairMeeks said:
1) Boris Johnson doesn't care about Salisbury. He cares so little that he ducked out of a Cobra briefing on the subject to be photographed resigning.Endillion said:
Salisbury.Streeter said:
On what is your presumption based?Endillion said:
If I was accustomed to giving credence to such arguments, I'd point out that Putin will presumably be unutterably furious at Johnson's elevation, but would be delighted should he be replaced by your friend from Islington.TheJezziah said:https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1154438815395864578
https://www.britainfirst.org/best_politically_incorrect_boris_quotes
I figure it would be easier just to list the far right groups that don't like Boris... Just have to find one first.
2) In the grand scheme of things, Salisbury doesn't matter much to Vladimir Putin anyway. His main strategic aim in Europe is to foment chaos and disorder, so he can divide and rule. Boris Johnson is an ideal choice from that perspective.
Otherwise, Johnson tends to be socially quite liberal and economically right wing. Pretty much the polar opposite of the authoritarian, socially conservative Putin.
Vladimir Putin won't be very interested in Boris Johnson's views anyway. He's just a useful tool.
Johnson genuinely has no principles at all. His opponents really need to push that point.0
){kind=link}