politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The first full poll after Swinson’s Brexit gamble sees the LDs
Comments
-
It was uncomfortable to watch. Chap who came after him very good tho.AlastairMeeks said:
Oh my. I feel ill on his behalf at that. He’ll have waking nightmares about that for the rest of his life.CarlottaVance said:https://twitter.com/iandunt/status/1174629934314196993?s=21
It’s getting worse....”Don’t abuse our politeness and don’t abuse Lady Hale’s patience”....0 -
HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?0 -
HYUFD said:
Indeed substantially further back than the UK, let alone Israel!0 -
Sober Byronic/Sean = sensible, logical RemainerAnabobazina said:
It was only a matter of time before your next volte-face.Byronic said:
it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.Benpointer said:
Quite possibly the only thing Brexit will destroy is... Brexit.Byronic said:
Brexit, if it ever happens, could still destroy the EU over the long term. The potential is clearly there.Benpointer said:
Which is Brexit going to destroy: the Monarchy, the Union, the Tories, the Labour party, the two-party system... or all of the above?Byronic said:
It is indeed a huge boost for the republican cause. That is the measure of Cameron's calamitous, blundering arrogance.148grss said:
Is this, alongside the current rigmarole, not an argument for an elected and actively political head of state? I understand that is not how things are done here, but really, it seems that the Queen may have said she was happy to be used politically in Indyref (as long as nobody admitted that was what she was doing) and she may have given the current PM the go ahead or even the idea itself of this prorogation (see Private Eye today). Obviously the monarch DOES act politically and just likes to be SEEN not to. That is much more dishonest than an elected political head of state doing what they have a mandate to do.Byronic said:The BBC's royal correspondent on Cameron's appalling "revelation"
"Just as the first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club, the first rule of the relationship between the prime minister and the Queen is that you never, ever talk about the relationship between the PM and the Queen.
"It is difficult to imagine anything other than horror in the Palace at David Cameron's revelations. Not just because he has broken the first rule. But because he has made it painfully clear that in 2014 he used the Queen for his own political purposes. And that she and her advisors thought that was OK."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49733588
I wonder what TSE and Nabavi think of their hero now? Cameron is a tosser and an imbecile. He is criminally negligent. Chuck him in jail.
In any event, it's laughable that some thought Brexit would spell the beginning of the end for the EU.
But, it seems like its going to destroy things closer to home, long before that.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?
Welcome back!
Drunk Byronic/Sean = fuck'em all, rabid Bexiteer0 -
I don't recall. I think the idea was to make it illegal for HM to be sovereign of both Scotland and rUK. It was all part of the project Fear stuff - like voting against indy being the only way to remain in the EU. But I have no idea what the current incumbent would have thought of it - and don't expect the notion came from Buckingham House.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?0 -
Boris Johnson as Rene, Nigel Farage as Mimi Labonq and Jeremy Corbyn as the Colonel - it could be a big hit.Alanbrooke said:
Helga from Allo Allo apparentlyScott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
Farage would be the policemanAlastairMeeks said:
Boris Johnson as Rene, Nigel Farage as Mimi Labonq and Jeremy Corbyn as the Colonel - it could be a big hit.Alanbrooke said:
Helga from Allo Allo apparentlyScott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
Such divisive views? It is not me using an expletive when someone expresses an opinion but I do espouse traditional conservative views yesAnabobazina said:
Do you espouse such divisive views on the doorstep in Epping Hemnall @HYUFD? I feel you are probably a very different guy IRL?Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.0 -
HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
Someone has to stand up for the stinking rich and their inherited privilege I suppose.0 -
Pclipp:
*****
I've said before, there must a critical mass/tipping point, at which the Lib Dem surge will go viral - as it were - as everyone realises they are credible contenders, and rushes to support them as a viable alternative to Brexit AND Corbyn.
What is that tipping point? It's got to be consistently beating Labour in polls, AND polling 25-30%, I think.
So they are not far away. And we are not far away from a huge realignment, when Labour are pushed into the shadows (where they belong) and the Lib Dems return as the main centre-left party of government and opposition,
Bring it on!0 -
Luciana Berger = Jones.Scott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
The inheritance tax threshold was raised to £1 million benefiting large numbers of ordinary families while the very rich still paid it under the ToriesBenpointer said:HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
Someone has to stand up for the stinking rich and their inherited privilege I suppose.1 -
It always has been, though 'decent' is perhaps too strong for anyone with any familiarity with the situation (Not meant as a criticism of your posting which is very speculative in wording_. In recent years the topic has been firmly left to the people to decide after indy (quite correctly too).Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?0 -
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised0 -
They could call it Good remoaningAlastairMeeks said:
Boris Johnson as Rene, Nigel Farage as Mimi Labonq and Jeremy Corbyn as the Colonel - it could be a big hit.Alanbrooke said:
Helga from Allo Allo apparentlyScott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
I meant decent as in potentially politically advantageous, not decent decentCarnyx said:
It always has been, though 'decent' is perhaps too strong for anyone with any familiarity with the situation (Not meant as a criticism of your posting which is very speculative in wording_. In recent years the topic has been firmly left to the people to decide after indy (quite correctly too).Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?
0 -
It's great when it eats it's own thoughBarnesian said:
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised2 -
I think the SNP proposal was that HMQ would do the Opening of the Scottish Parliament, etc, directly, which would be different to the position in Canada/Australia which have a Governor-General as her representative, and I believe HMG said that Scotland could have a Governor-General or become a Republic, but not have the Queen directly.Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
0 -
Absolutely, Mr Byronic. And if big business decides to desert the Tories and pour in resources to back the Lib Dems, there is no knowing how far and how fast the political landscape may change in this country.Byronic said:Pclipp:
*****
I've said before, there must a critical mass/tipping point, at which the Lib Dem surge will go viral - as it were - as everyone realises they are credible contenders, and rushes to support them as a viable alternative to Brexit AND Corbyn.
What is that tipping point? It's got to be consistently beating Labour in polls, AND polling 25-30%, I think.
So they are not far away. And we are not far away from a huge realignment, when Labour are pushed into the shadows (where they belong) and the Lib Dems return as the main centre-left party of government and opposition,
Bring it on!0 -
Peter Mandelson already didBenpointer said:HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
Someone has to stand up for the stinking rich and their inherited privilege I suppose.0 -
Morris_Dancer said: The super pro-Remain types are not going to vote twice for the Lib Dems, so they've lost rather than gained potential support. And if their numbers are currently rising that doesn't dispel the fact that they've put a ceiling on that support by deciding a referendum result should be ignored in favour of an electoral result, which could be won by 35% support from the electorate.
Reply:
You are quite right, Mr Dancer, when you write about individual electors and their restricted opportunities of voting twice.
However, I think you also need to take into account the business community, whose interests have been pretty well wrecked by the Conservatives`self-indulgence and short-sightedness. The investment banker community, hedge fund managers and other spivs and chances will love the uncertainty that the Conservatives have given them to gamble with the country`s future.
But while the Conservatives may be flush with donations from these chancers, the business community, who prefer certainty and stability, may well turn and take a second look at what the Lib Dems are offering. After all, the Lib Dems did give them five years of stable government during the Coalition years. And now they are being given the chance to put an end to all this Brexit nonsense, just like that.0 -
Agree on thatBarnesian said:
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised0 -
Starmer = Ash for purely robotic reasons.Dura_Ace said:
Luciana Berger = Jones.Scott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?
The Tory Party is obviously Kane, a gutted steaming corpse once Brexit has fully erupted from its chest.0 -
Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
Yet again, you have a failure of comprehension. I analysed your points defending private education, pointing out that they were flat assertions and questionable. I have not delivered any conclusion about the overall merits of it other than to point out there are problems that cut against the long term economic health of this country.HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
I would be interested in arguments against that, or arguments orthogonal to that, say on liberal principles. Perhaps a defence of the idea that stratification does somehow increase the quality of state schools?
But you don't seem to be up to the challenge. Perhaps because your views haven't been thought through, or perhaps you're simply lazy. "Hard left" is such an indolent way to dismiss these questions. Have a bit more courage about your ability to defend your perspective intellectually rather than using cheap and embarrassingly inaccurate slogans.0 -
I only ever have the odd pop in Alan at best. Once he has his party going I will have a look.Alanbrooke said:
lolmalcolmg said:
Lovely people your unionistsTheuniondivvie said:
Yoon ultras got there a long time ago.slade said:Photo going round on Twitter showing Jo Swinson in a SS uniform. Why?
https://twitter.com/dww_994/status/1046845138142736384?s=20
I take it youve stopped reading Wings over Scotland then ?0 -
Thank you - that may well be what I recall. It seems odd, as on dissolution of the Treaty of Union the present UK would simply revert to the 1603-1707 situation, with the union of the Crowns but not of the KIngdoms. In which case HMG would seem to have proposed to very substantially change Royal powers and prerogatives, ie by forcing HM (effectively) to abdicate much of her position in Scotland?OblitusSumMe said:
I think the SNP proposal was that HMQ would do the Opening of the Scottish Parliament, etc, directly, which would be different to the position in Canada/Australia which have a Governor-General as her representative, and I believe HMG said that Scotland could have a Governor-General or become a Republic, but not have the Queen directly.Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
0 -
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
That is your unionists for you , they just cannot stop lyingAnabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?0 -
Gods, there are actually some people who would consider voting for that guy?malcolmg said:
I only ever have the odd pop in Alan at best. Once he has his party going I will have a look.Alanbrooke said:
lolmalcolmg said:
Lovely people your unionistsTheuniondivvie said:
Yoon ultras got there a long time ago.slade said:Photo going round on Twitter showing Jo Swinson in a SS uniform. Why?
https://twitter.com/dww_994/status/1046845138142736384?s=20
I take it youve stopped reading Wings over Scotland then ?
Shudder.0 -
Yes. That's the sound of the Queen polishing the axe at the Tower.dyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Jesus Christ. David Cameron! How did I not realise he is THIS thick?0 -
He is what I believe they call a mahoosive twatByronic said:
Yes. That's the sound of the Queen polishing the axe at the Tower.dyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Jesus Christ. David Cameron! How did I not realise he is THIS thick?0 -
No Sir Dave thendyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
0 -
Never been an issue, there are republicans in most parties in Scotland.Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?0 -
You're right. The last thing we need is some kind of insight into what goes on in Government.Byronic said:
We don't have to (though I have read all the Times extracts, in their miserable witlessness). We can just watch the TV snippet:TOPPING said:
Have you read the book?Byronic said:
Oh god, you're defending him??TOPPING said:
He said he didn't say anything to her but had discussions with her private secretary, about what he doesn't say although I can well believe it was along the lines of: "Q Would she? A: No." Does it say in the book explicitly that he spoke with HMQ and asked this? Because that isn't how he described it this morning.Byronic said:The BBC's royal correspondent on Cameron's appalling "revelation"
"Just as the first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club, the first rule of the relationship between the prime minister and the Queen is that you never, ever talk about the relationship between the PM and the Queen.
"It is difficult to imagine anything other than horror in the Palace at David Cameron's revelations. Not just because he has broken the first rule. But because he has made it painfully clear that in 2014 he used the Queen for his own political purposes. And that she and her advisors thought that was OK."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49733588
I wonder what TSE and Nabavi think of their hero now? Cameron is a tosser and an imbecile. He is criminally negligent. Chuck him in jail.
"I don't want to say anything more about this, I'm sure some people would think, possibly even me, that I've already said a bit too much."
Yes, David, it is just possible you may have said a bit too much. Yes.0 -
Hed make a very good PM though, you have that on his own recommendationByronic said:
Yes. That's the sound of the Queen polishing the axe at the Tower.dyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Jesus Christ. David Cameron! How did I not realise he is THIS thick?0 -
He will follow in Tony and gordons footsteps of not getting a KGAlanbrooke said:
No Sir Dave thendyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
Not for the better if it is the Lib DemsPClipp said:
Absolutely, Mr Byronic. And if big business decides to desert the Tories and pour in resources to back the Lib Dems, there is no knowing how far and how fast the political landscape may change in this country.Byronic said:Pclipp:
*****
I've said before, there must a critical mass/tipping point, at which the Lib Dem surge will go viral - as it were - as everyone realises they are credible contenders, and rushes to support them as a viable alternative to Brexit AND Corbyn.
What is that tipping point? It's got to be consistently beating Labour in polls, AND polling 25-30%, I think.
So they are not far away. And we are not far away from a huge realignment, when Labour are pushed into the shadows (where they belong) and the Lib Dems return as the main centre-left party of government and opposition,
Bring it on!0 -
I do the same, but I reckon hes getting madder by the day. Thats what living in England does for you. :-)malcolmg said:
I only ever have the odd pop in Alan at best. Once he has his party going I will have a look.Alanbrooke said:
lolmalcolmg said:
Lovely people your unionistsTheuniondivvie said:
Yoon ultras got there a long time ago.slade said:Photo going round on Twitter showing Jo Swinson in a SS uniform. Why?
https://twitter.com/dww_994/status/1046845138142736384?s=20
I take it youve stopped reading Wings over Scotland then ?0 -
The other good quote from Garnier was the law that parliament passes most often is the law of unintended consequences.CarlottaVance said:Good point:
Dissolution transfers power to the electorate
Prorogation transfers power to the executive0 -
I would like to point out that in 1983 the SDP Liberal Alliance were polling 25-26% just before the 1983 election, neck and neck with Labour, They got 25.4% of the actual votes cast. For this they were rewarded with a whopping 23 MPs.Byronic said:Pclipp:
*****
I've said before, there must a critical mass/tipping point, at which the Lib Dem surge will go viral - as it were - as everyone realises they are credible contenders, and rushes to support them as a viable alternative to Brexit AND Corbyn.
What is that tipping point? It's got to be consistently beating Labour in polls, AND polling 25-30%, I think.
So they are not far away. And we are not far away from a huge realignment, when Labour are pushed into the shadows (where they belong) and the Lib Dems return as the main centre-left party of government and opposition,
Bring it on!
I reckon 26% will get the LDs more seats in 2019 but it is certainly not close to the tipping point. Over 30%? Maybe.0 -
The Inheritance Tax threshold is still £325,000 https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-taxHYUFD said:
The inheritance tax threshold was raised to £1 million benefiting large numbers of ordinary families while the very rich still paid it under the ToriesBenpointer said:HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
Someone has to stand up for the stinking rich and their inherited privilege I suppose.
Weren't you told this before?
I know the Tories promised to increase it to £1 million, but it doesn't look like something Cameron/Osborne implemented before they lost office, and it was something May forgot about.0 -
He's the Mark Francois of Scottish Independence. Utterly barking and completely unhinged.Alanbrooke said:
I do the same, but I reckon hes getting madder by the day. Thats what living in England does for you. :-)malcolmg said:
I only ever have the odd pop in Alan at best. Once he has his party going I will have a look.Alanbrooke said:
lolmalcolmg said:
Lovely people your unionistsTheuniondivvie said:
Yoon ultras got there a long time ago.slade said:Photo going round on Twitter showing Jo Swinson in a SS uniform. Why?
https://twitter.com/dww_994/status/1046845138142736384?s=20
I take it youve stopped reading Wings over Scotland then ?0 -
LOL, him and Swinson in Bath, must be in the waterAlanbrooke said:
I do the same, but I reckon hes getting madder by the day. Thats what living in England does for you. :-)malcolmg said:
I only ever have the odd pop in Alan at best. Once he has his party going I will have a look.Alanbrooke said:
lolmalcolmg said:
Lovely people your unionistsTheuniondivvie said:
Yoon ultras got there a long time ago.slade said:Photo going round on Twitter showing Jo Swinson in a SS uniform. Why?
https://twitter.com/dww_994/status/1046845138142736384?s=20
I take it youve stopped reading Wings over Scotland then ?0 -
.
So he DOES watch tv!AlastairMeeks said:
Boris Johnson as Rene, Nigel Farage as Mimi Labonq and Jeremy Corbyn as the Colonel - it could be a big hit.Alanbrooke said:
Helga from Allo Allo apparentlyScott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
It's for a Tory-approved family - married (etc) couple plus extra for leaving the house to their direct children by blood. Tough luck on aunties.OblitusSumMe said:
The Inheritance Tax threshold is still £325,000 https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-taxHYUFD said:
The inheritance tax threshold was raised to £1 million benefiting large numbers of ordinary families while the very rich still paid it under the ToriesBenpointer said:HYUFD said:
I am not a pure capitalist and never have been, I care more about conservatism than capitalism and far more voters support cutting inheritance tax than the top rate of income tax for example.Noo said:
I don't really give a fuck what you think you are. I'm telling you you look stupid when you misidentify someone as "hard left" when they're trying to defend capitalism.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant
And it weakens the fight against the hard left: by lumping reasonable centrist views in with them, you sanitise their ideology. It's exactly the same mistake the hard left have long made. By making people like me out to be right wing, they make real right wingers seem more sensible than they are.
You also advocated scrapping private education too which is hard left on any definition
Someone has to stand up for the stinking rich and their inherited privilege I suppose.
Weren't you told this before?
I know the Tories promised to increase it to £1 million, but it doesn't look like something Cameron/Osborne implemented before they lost office, and it was something May forgot about.0 -
With that and the Supreme Court’s annihilation of Mr Lavery QC, it’s been a good day for froideur.Byronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
Ah! So David "I'd be rather good at being prime minister" Cameron has done all this, so we can get an insight into the functioning of government?TOPPING said:
You're right. The last thing we need is some kind of insight into what goes on in Government.Byronic said:
We don't have to (though I have read all the Times extracts, in their miserable witlessness). We can just watch the TV snippet:TOPPING said:
Have you read the book?Byronic said:
Oh god, you're defending him??TOPPING said:
He said he didn't say anything to her but had discussions with her private secretary, about what he doesn't say although I can well believe it was along the lines of: "Q Would she? A: No." Does it say in the book explicitly that he spoke with HMQ and asked this? Because that isn't how he described it this morning.Byronic said:The BBC's royal correspondent on Cameron's appalling "revelation"
"Just as the first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club, the first rule of the relationship between the prime minister and the Queen is that you never, ever talk about the relationship between the PM and the Queen.
"It is difficult to imagine anything other than horror in the Palace at David Cameron's revelations. Not just because he has broken the first rule. But because he has made it painfully clear that in 2014 he used the Queen for his own political purposes. And that she and her advisors thought that was OK."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49733588
I wonder what TSE and Nabavi think of their hero now? Cameron is a tosser and an imbecile. He is criminally negligent. Chuck him in jail.
"I don't want to say anything more about this, I'm sure some people would think, possibly even me, that I've already said a bit too much."
Yes, David, it is just possible you may have said a bit too much. Yes.
Right? So it wasn't a desperate attempt to regain some credibility and importance with a massively misjudged revelation on a silly TV show which has now backfired catastrophically, further endangering the Union and the Monarchy, wrecking his reputation even more comprehensively, and earning the public fury of the Palace?
0 -
Typical cis white maleBarnesian said:
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised0 -
This guy for example.malcolmg said:
Never been an issue, there are republicans in most parties in Scotland.Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?
https://twitter.com/Theuniondivvie/status/1168114350034493440?s=200 -
Its going to be quite a time until we get another PM knighted they all have the seal of Royal disapprovaldyedwoolie said:
He will follow in Tony and gordons footsteps of not getting a KGAlanbrooke said:
No Sir Dave thendyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Swotty Theresa might have got away with it but cant until the blockage in front of her clears. Time to call Dynorod and remove three shits.0 -
As we lawyers all know the purpose of the advocacy is to impress the clients and make them feel that their money was well spent.DavidL said:
I would agree with this. Also in the SC written advocacy in advance of the hearing is at least as important as oral advocacy, probably more so. In my cases there the written case took huge amounts of work and angst. My seniors spent a long time on their speech but the main purpose of standing up was so that the Justices could ask their questions arising from the written case and address their concerns. They didn't really need to hear what they had already read.AlastairMeeks said:
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.nico67 said:Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM . 0 -
Even tuition fees boy got his gongAlanbrooke said:
Its going to be quite a time until we get another PM knighted they all have the seal of Royal disapprovaldyedwoolie said:
He will follow in Tony and gordons footsteps of not getting a KGAlanbrooke said:
No Sir Dave thendyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Swotty Theresa might have got away with it but cant until the blockage in front of her clears. Time to call Dynorod and remove three shits.0 -
Among us lesser mortals I suspect that amounts to “Fecking Nuclear” and “Blew a Gasket”Byronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
Tell that fucker hes going down!CarlottaVance said:
Among us lesser mortals I suspect that amounts to “Fecking Nuclear” and “Blew a Gasket”Byronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.0 -
No.Byronic said:
Ah! So David "I'd be rather good at being prime minister" Cameron has done all this, so we can get an insight into the functioning of government?TOPPING said:
You're right. The last thing we need is some kind of insight into what goes on in Government.Byronic said:
We don't have to (though I have read all the Times extracts, in their miserable witlessness). We can just watch the TV snippet:TOPPING said:
Have you read the book?Byronic said:
Oh god, you're defending him??TOPPING said:
He said he didn't say anything to her but had discussions with her private secretary, about what he doesn't say although I can well believe it was along the lines of: "Q Would she? A: No." Does it say in the book explicitly that he spoke with HMQ and asked this? Because that isn't how he described it this morning.Byronic said:The BBC's royal correspondent on Cameron's appalling "revelation"
"Just as the first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club, the first rule of the relationship between the prime minister and the Queen is that you never, ever talk about the relationship between the PM and the Queen.
"It is difficult to imagine anything other than horror in the Palace at David Cameron's revelations. Not just because he has broken the first rule. But because he has made it painfully clear that in 2014 he used the Queen for his own political purposes. And that she and her advisors thought that was OK."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49733588
I wonder what TSE and Nabavi think of their hero now? Cameron is a tosser and an imbecile. He is criminally negligent. Chuck him in jail.
"I don't want to say anything more about this, I'm sure some people would think, possibly even me, that I've already said a bit too much."
Yes, David, it is just possible you may have said a bit too much. Yes.
Right? So it wasn't a desperate attempt to regain some credibility and importance with a massively misjudged revelation on a silly TV show which has now backfired catastrophically, further endangering the Union and the Monarchy, wrecking his reputation even more comprehensively, and earning the public fury of the Palace?
Telling comment by the bloke who made the documentary on Cameron - he feared losing Scotland more than he feared Brexit. ie why wouldn't you try to enlist the services of the Queen to try to keep her Kingdom together?0 -
Can Nabavi and TSE please come back and defend their hero Cameron? Topping's heart really isn't in it.
We want some bloodsport.1 -
Cameron must rank as one of the most arrogant Prime Ministers we've ever had.0
-
May be those feet did walk upon ....CarlottaVance said:0 -
Yes holding individuals account for their actions, super illiberal...Barnesian said:
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised
It isn't that there was a bygone era where nobody knew better because there are always people who know that the racism or bigotry or other oppression is wrong; the oppressed. To use the argument "it was the past, it was worse then" is not a get out of jail free card.0 -
Sir Boris Johnson KG said there was still no details on the whereabouts of citizen Dave0
-
Anagrams of David Cameron
some seem strangely apt
http://www.anagramgenius.com/archive/david-cameron.html0 -
He gets worse with the passage of time. Like Tonywilliamglenn said:Cameron must rank as one of the most arrogant Prime Ministers we've ever had.
0 -
It was also the millennium, not some distant vaudeville theatre in the days of empire148grss said:
Yes holding individuals account for their actions, super illiberal...Barnesian said:
I agree with you. I find this new "woke" world quite bewildering. The peer pressure to conform to silly new-age conventions is very illiberal. Mills would not have approved.HYUFD said:
He was singing a Harry Belafonte song in a school talent show, again I don't see what the fuss was about and why he needed to apologise reallydyedwoolie said:
He also admits to wearing blackface and singing the banana boat song. That's his look out, the take away is he is not what he presents himself to be. I wonder what other skeletons?HYUFD said:
Trudeau was also playing a genie in an Aladdin show, not a black and white minstrel.slade said:Time to confess like Trudeau. I once blacked up and wore a fez. I was playing one of the Three Wise Men in a Christmas show at primary school. It was 1953.
Personally I cannot see what the fuss is about even if he has apologised
It isn't that there was a bygone era where nobody knew better because there are always people who know that the racism or bigotry or other oppression is wrong; the oppressed. To use the argument "it was the past, it was worse then" is not a get out of jail free card.0 -
And why exactly would you talk about it? Why would you break a fundamental rule of our Constitutional Monarchy, that prime ministerial communications with the sovereign remain utterly secret?TOPPING said:
No.Byronic said:
Ah! So David "I'd be rather good at being prime minister" Cameron has done all this, so we can get an insight into the functioning of government?TOPPING said:
You're right. The last thing we need is some kind of insight into what goes on in Government.Byronic said:
We don't have to (though I have read all the Times extracts, in their miserable witlessness). We can just watch the TV snippet:TOPPING said:
Have you read the book?Byronic said:
Oh god, you're defending him??TOPPING said:
He said he didn't say anything to her but had discussions with her private secretary, about what he doesn't say although I can well believe it was along the lines of: "Q Would she? A: No." Does it say in the book explicitly that he spoke with HMQ and asked this? Because that isn't how he described it this morning.Byronic said:The BBC's royal correspondent on Cameron's appalling "revelation"
"Just as the first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club, the first rule of the relationship between the prime minister and the Queen is that you never, ever talk about the relationship between the PM and the Queen.
"It is K."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49733588
I wonder what TSE and Nabavi think of their hero now? Cameron is a tosser and an imbecile. He is criminally negligent. Chuck him in jail.
"I don't want to say anything more about this, I'm sure some people would think, possibly even me, that I've already said a bit too much."
Yes, David, it is just possible you may have said a bit too much. Yes.
Right? So it wasn't a desperate attempt to regain some credibility and importance with a massively misjudged revelation on a silly TV show which has now backfired catastrophically, further endangering the Union and the Monarchy, wrecking his reputation even more comprehensively, and earning the public fury of the Palace?
Telling comment by the bloke who made the documentary on Cameron - he feared losing Scotland more than he feared Brexit. ie why wouldn't you try to enlist the services of the Queen to try to keep her Kingdom together?
Why did Dave Cameron do that? Because he's a chateau bottled, copper fastened, top of the range KNOBBER.0 -
Actually if boz did lie to HMQ could him and Dave be the new princes in the tower?0
-
You really are a plonker of the first order. "I am more of a Tory than you..." FFS, Have you just stepped out of playground? No wonder the Conservative Party is going to hell in a handcart if you are representative (which you probably are) of the type of people that support it. Utterly pathetic.HYUFD said:
I am more of a Tory than you given you are basically a free market liberal not a traditional conservative who for a time used the Tories as the best vehicle to keep Labour out and have now returned to your natural home in the Liberal DemocratsNigel_Foremain said:
You are anything but a traditional Tory. You are an unquestioning cult follower of a man totally unsuitable to be PM who has supported an English nationalist policy that is anti-business and economy wrecking. You are just a very simple right winger who is far more UKIP/BNP than Traditional Tory, who uses pathetic and childish epithets as though they are insults in exactly the same way as extremists always have throughout the ages.HYUFD said:
As you should know full well by now I am a traditional Tory not a pure free market liberal capitalistNoo said:
I got as far as "hard left rant" and stopped reading. Just so you know, I talked about defending capitalism in my post. If you can't be bothered to read my contribution, please don't bother replying. For your sake as much as mine, because you look like a fool when you say things like that.HYUFD said:
Despite your hard left rant0 -
Yes he possibly shouldn't have mentioned it. But as I suspected (and I have now listened to the recording of him) it was PS to PS. It's entirely possible that he believed that as it was one step removed from HMQ and he was rebuffed, that it added some harmless colour to his story. Had it been accepted then I'm sure nothing more would have been said about it.Byronic said:And why exactly would you talk about it? Why would you break a fundamental rule of our Constitutional Monarchy, that prime ministerial communications with the sovereign remain utterly secret?
Why did Dave Cameron do that? Because he's a chateau bottled, copper fastened, top of the range KNOBBER.
It was their private secretaries. Plenty of stuff gets passed over the desk of the Royals' households without the Royals ever knowing about it.0 -
0
-
The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.0 -
Probably too clunkingly obvious, but ponces surely?dyedwoolie said:Actually if boz did lie to HMQ could him and Dave be the new princes in the tower?
0 -
Nah. It was the Queen's household, not the Queen. This is just spin but I perfectly understand if most people are unable to distinguish between the two. You especially.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.0 -
Jolyon Maugham thinks his own side is winning? Well blow me down.Scott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/11746644752801382421 -
Cameron won't give a fuck. He doesn't have BJ's pathological need to be liked. He'll trouser the book money, move on to his next venture and be serenely untroubled.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.0 -
So you know more about the palace and the Queen, than.... the spokesmen for the Queen, at the palace? Righty-ho. Keep taking the anti-psychotics.TOPPING said:
Nah. It was the Queen's household, not the Queen. This is just spin but I perfectly understand if most people are unable to distinguish between the two. You especially.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.0 -
I think his book is probabaly quite dull - he needs it to sell - join the dots.Byronic said:
Yes. That's the sound of the Queen polishing the axe at the Tower.dyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Jesus Christ. David Cameron! How did I not realise he is THIS thick?0 -
Cameron has a reputation to damage?Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.0 -
Weren't the Reverend of Bath and Craig Murray Lib Dems prior to the coalition era? I guess people can change their minds on constitutional matters.Theuniondivvie said:
This guy for example.malcolmg said:
Never been an issue, there are republicans in most parties in Scotland.Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?
https://twitter.com/Theuniondivvie/status/1168114350034493440?s=200 -
foolish for anyone to get ahead of themselves, on either side or in the press. Let's just wait and see.RobD said:
Jolyon Maugham thinks his own side is winning? Well blow me down.Scott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/11746644752801382420 -
Scott's crap tweets number 1,264,597Scott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/11746644752801382420 -
I think you're absolutely wrong. Cameron is an old fashioned pragmatic Tory (a singularly dim one, as it turns out, but that's not the point here). He loves his country and his monarch.Dura_Ace said:
Cameron won't give a fuck. He doesn't have BJ's pathological need to be liked. He'll trouser the book money, move on to his next venture and be serenely untroubled.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.
My guess is he will be cringing right now, and deeply troubled by what he's done. And the public dressing down from his Queen will be bitter.0 -
He's screwed himself over just to sell a book. Does he need the money? Could he have waited a few more years? Ludicrous man and not the first time his judgement has failed him.Byronic said:
I think you're absolutely wrong. Cameron is an old fashioned pragmatic Tory (a singularly dim one, as it turns out, but that's not the point here). He loves his country and his monarch.Dura_Ace said:
Cameron won't give a fuck. He doesn't have BJ's pathological need to be liked. He'll trouser the book money, move on to his next venture and be serenely untroubled.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.
My guess is he will be cringing right now, and deeply troubled by what he's done. And the public dressing down from his Queen will be bitter.0 -
Have m'luds examined Major over his own experience of proroging parliament yet ?
0 -
The thing about tipping points is that there is a sudden change. With three and maybe two half parties it's difficult to work out where that may be. It certainly won't be linear.eristdoof said:
I would like to point out that in 1983 the SDP Liberal Alliance were polling 25-26% just before the 1983 election, neck and neck with Labour, They got 25.4% of the actual votes cast. For this they were rewarded with a whopping 23 MPs.Byronic said:Pclipp:
*****
I've said before, there must a critical mass/tipping point, at which the Lib Dem surge will go viral - as it were - as everyone realises they are credible contenders, and rushes to support them as a viable alternative to Brexit AND Corbyn.
What is that tipping point? It's got to be consistently beating Labour in polls, AND polling 25-30%, I think.
So they are not far away. And we are not far away from a huge realignment, when Labour are pushed into the shadows (where they belong) and the Lib Dems return as the main centre-left party of government and opposition,
Bring it on!
I reckon 26% will get the LDs more seats in 2019 but it is certainly not close to the tipping point. Over 30%? Maybe.
The same is true of Climate Change, if we get to a tipping point where there's a positive feedback loop we are all in big trouble.0 -
The Queen's spokesman, eh?Byronic said:
So you know more about the palace and the Queen, than.... the spokesmen for the Queen, at the palace? Righty-ho. Keep taking the anti-psychotics.TOPPING said:
Nah. It was the Queen's household, not the Queen. This is just spin but I perfectly understand if most people are unable to distinguish between the two. You especially.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.
LOL0 -
Who plays the part of the sexy French waitress Yvette?AlastairMeeks said:
Boris Johnson as Rene, Nigel Farage as Mimi Labonq and Jeremy Corbyn as the Colonel - it could be a big hit.Alanbrooke said:
Helga from Allo Allo apparentlyScott_P said:
Is Jo Swinson, Ripley?Byronic said:it just occurred to me that Brexit is like the alien in Alien. We hoped to harness it and use it, but it has morphed into a danger to everyone, and it bleeds pure acid.
Now we cower on the spaceship, wondering what, or who, it will eat next.
Does that make Revoke the escape podule?0 -
POBWASScott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/11746644752801382420 -
There is the precedent of the Irish Free State, which had a Governor-General after Independence, despite Ireland previously being a separate realm. The difference there being that the Irish didn't particularly want to retain the monarch.Carnyx said:
Thank you - that may well be what I recall. It seems odd, as on dissolution of the Treaty of Union the present UK would simply revert to the 1603-1707 situation, with the union of the Crowns but not of the KIngdoms. In which case HMG would seem to have proposed to very substantially change Royal powers and prerogatives, ie by forcing HM (effectively) to abdicate much of her position in Scotland?OblitusSumMe said:
I think the SNP proposal was that HMQ would do the Opening of the Scottish Parliament, etc, directly, which would be different to the position in Canada/Australia which have a Governor-General as her representative, and I believe HMG said that Scotland could have a Governor-General or become a Republic, but not have the Queen directly.Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
0 -
As Scott approaches his 50,000th post what percentage were actually his own view ?Brom said:
Scott's crap tweets number 1,264,597Scott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/11746644752801382420 -
‘were’ no details.dyedwoolie said:Sir Boris Johnson KG said there was still no details on the whereabouts of citizen Dave
0 -
If you recall I believe you may have been comparing him to Gordon Brown at the time.Byronic said:
Yes. That's the sound of the Queen polishing the axe at the Tower.dyedwoolie said:
That's about as furious as you can get from buck houseByronic said:Glorious royal understatement:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1174658171543150603?s=20
David Cameron is lucky they shut Traitor's Gate.
Jesus Christ. David Cameron! How did I not realise he is THIS thick?0 -
So a clever and thorough barrister who is slow to respond and mumbles with a lisp, should be good value!Cyclefree said:
As we lawyers all know the purpose of the advocacy is to impress the clients and make them feel that their money was well spent.DavidL said:
I would agree with this. Also in the SC written advocacy in advance of the hearing is at least as important as oral advocacy, probably more so. In my cases there the written case took huge amounts of work and angst. My seniors spent a long time on their speech but the main purpose of standing up was so that the Justices could ask their questions arising from the written case and address their concerns. They didn't really need to hear what they had already read.AlastairMeeks said:
Unpopular view: the barristers matter much less than most people imagine. The idea that a Supreme Court judge is going to be persuaded by oratory or skilful argument is rather hopeful. These are extremely clever people who know all the tricks and who will have been thinking very deeply about this for themselves. The barristers’ most valuable function is poking holes in their opponents’ arguments.nico67 said:Today should be like a hits compilation in the SC.
Various interventions and crucially Lord Pannick is the last speaker .
At this point I’d say its impossible to call re the lawfulness of the decision however in terms of justiciable I’d put that as a much better chance as it’s hard to see the court giving a blank check to a future PM .0 -
No he won't.Byronic said:
I think you're absolutely wrong. Cameron is an old fashioned pragmatic Tory (a singularly dim one, as it turns out, but that's not the point here). He loves his country and his monarch.Dura_Ace said:
Cameron won't give a fuck. He doesn't have BJ's pathological need to be liked. He'll trouser the book money, move on to his next venture and be serenely untroubled.Byronic said:The Palace REALLY isn't happy. This is quite serious, and supremely bad for what remains of Cameron's reputation.
"The source told the BBC that "it serves no one's interests" for conversations between the PM and the Queen to be made public .
"It makes it very hard for the relationship to thrive," they added."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49756756
Cameron's aristocratic wife, the daughter of Reggie Sheffield, 8th Baronet, will surely thump him with a rolling pin this evening.
My guess is he will be cringing right now, and deeply troubled by what he's done. And the public dressing down from his Queen will be bitter.0 -
Interesting that the Palace has the time and the inclination to express the Queen’s displeasure about David Cameron’s comments but doesn’t have the inclination nor the time to condemn Randy Andy for hanging around with a convicted nonce.
We all know which is worse.
#Priorities0 -
I don't understand the point of Scott P's posts. By all means put forward partisan views on politics but how can anyone spend 18 hours a day digging up random tweets and just sticking them on the forum? It's a waste of a life and I feel a bit sorry for him.Alanbrooke said:
As Scott approaches his 50,000th post what percentage were actually his own view ?Brom said:
Scott's crap tweets number 1,264,597Scott_P said:For future reference
https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/1174664475280138242
Having said that he does help confirm my pre existing views about twitter!0 -
Nether of them as yet elected to any public office on policies diametrically opposed to ones previously supported by them (I have no idea what changes have occurred in their constitutional views).RandallFlagg said:
Weren't the Reverend of Bath and Craig Murray Lib Dems prior to the coalition era? I guess people can change their minds on constitutional matters.Theuniondivvie said:
This guy for example.malcolmg said:
Never been an issue, there are republicans in most parties in Scotland.Pulpstar said:HYUFD said:
Well quite - the SNP should have, may have laughed that one out of court. I'd guess there is some anti-monarchist sentiment within the independence movement though so it's probably a decent political issue for unionists to focus on to try and peel off votes from the indy side.Anabobazina said:Carnyx said:
I was forgetting: there were threats during indyref to make it illegal for the Queen to continue in that role for Scotland if it went independent. My memory is that theu originated in the Tory government or more probably the Tory Party - the usual suspects amongst the backbenchers.Anabobazina said:
I believe that is the SNP position, yes. It would be a constitutional monarchy like several other Commonwealth nations.Pulpstar said:If Scotland were to gain independence would they retain HM as the Head of State ?
How would it be illegal? Is it illegal in Canada or Australia?
https://twitter.com/Theuniondivvie/status/1168114350034493440?s=20
In the changing mind stakes, switching from 'If you want democracy, down with crown' to SCon MSP fawning over HMQ, the Union & The Rangers is at the outer extremes of Damascene turns.0 -
-
lolTheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that the Palace has the time and the inclination to express the Queen’s displeasure about David Cameron’s comments but doesn’t have the inclination nor the time to condemn Randy Andy for hanging around with a convicted nonce.
We all know which is worse.
#Priorities
I take it that means you dont want to discuss Dave making a tit of himself0
