politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » These perceptions of Johnson could be critical in an election

Benpointer said:

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

... provided someone can invent a hitherto unknown superstrong material to build it from.

Oh, and how do you get over the minor issue that the moon is anything but stationary relevant to the earth's surface?

There's no need to tether a space elevator to the Moon. If you have the top end sufficiently far up Earth's gravity well it takes very little additional effort to get from there to the Moon (or indeed Mars).

It would be a vast engineering effort - as well as needing new, stronger materials, you'd be best off manufacturing it from an asteroid captured into Earth orbit, descending the elevator from the asteroid, so you'd need to develop a robot manufacturing facility that would create this wonder material in low gravity and assemble the elevator cable in space.

It makes for great science fiction - see the Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson - but we are a considerable distance from making it a reality. Fusion will happen first!

Andy_JS said:

Apparently Johnson had been awake for 25 hours when he was in the Commons yesterday.

And an ass for 50 years...

"The German Greens are running at 38pc in the Baden-Württemberg polls. This is more than the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats combined."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/09/25/green-taliban-will-sweep-away-liberal-order-unless-get-grip/

https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1177261771477966859

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

dyedwoolie said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

dyedwoolie said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

dyedwoolie said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

MarqueeMark said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1177166970636132352?s=20

Wales: Labour goes from 28 to 15 seats. Tories up to 17.

This in firebrand socialist Welsh Wales.

So very very unlikely. A lot of even middle class Welsh people I have met would rather poke their eyes out with a stick than vote Tory.

Much of the Welsh red stronghold is predicated on red rosette on a donkey votes. If that starts to fracture a la Scotland 2010, the Tories are in a solid second in many seats. Its probably a reasonable bet for a BXP gain too somewhere if they poll above about 15% nationally

I would think Plaid or LibDems more likely beneficiaries in practice. Possibly the Brexit National Party

Plaid in places yes. The LDs are noid will probably take Ynys Mon for example

I think if the Tories are the downward slide I cannot see people in Wales providing them with a fillip, tho I suppose the Scots did last time. Do they have a Welsh Ruth?

Ok so the cluster of NE Wales seats - delyn, alyn and deeside etc are all currently lab ca 50 Tory in the 40s none else featuring, there's maybe 5 seats there, plus Gower and Newport and a couple of the Cardiff seats in a similar state, these would be legitimate Tory targets in a 33 to 25 Con v Lab result, in the sense that in a lab meltdown nobody else would take them from nowhere.......

Hmm, interesting, thank you. I haven't been to Wales for years. I still find it hard to see a Labour meltdown there. Elsewhere yes, but not Wales

Then try opening your eyes to the YouGov polling of Wales which shows much greater swings against Labour there than across GB as a whole. The last poll in late July, when the national polling picture was quite similar to that now, had the following (with changes on the GE result):
Lab 22 (-27)
Con 24 (-10)
Plaid 15 (+5)
Lib 16 (+11)
Brex 18 (+18)

By comparison, in the 2015 General Election in Scotland, the Labour vote share was down a mere 18%.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/6dmjcft8ql/Results_WelshBarometer_July2019_W.pdf

The Labour vote down 27% in Wales and down 25% in London on 2017 according to YouGov, looks like following Scotland 2015 Wales and London are next up for a Labour meltdown, with only the North of England left as a real Labour heartland under Corbyn

Every day this gets worse. A madness has taken hold. A complete nervous breakdown.

What are we doing to our pleasant, polite country?

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1177244160681795584

The UK used to be a beacon of stability and the rule of law. Now...

surbiton19 said:

There are now two sets of polls. YouGov , Opinium on the one side and the Rest on the other. Their samples, methodology whatever produce completely different results.

I'd say Opinum/Kantar on one end (maybe ICM also), Comres/Survation at the other.

Nigel_Foremain said:

I think there is a danger of hyperbole with all this. I tend to take it with a pinch of salt when Leavers claim that if they don't get their way, and soon there are going to be barricades (presumably of bathchairs) on the streets. Britain has changed for the worse over this ridiculous saga, but this is still Britain

I agree there will be no May 68 here if Brexit is cancelled. That is Project Fear. But I do think our politics will have been poisoned and that the damage will take a long time to repair. So IMO Brexit MUST happen and I think that it will. Which means that we will pass the Withdrawal Agreement. Don't know where and I definitely don't know when. But I know we'll pass the Withdrawal Agreement some sunny day.

felix said:

Oh. @Valerie_VazMP challanges @Geoffrey_Cox to resign and fight a by-election. Why not a General Election? Val's seat of Walsall South voted Leave 65.4%. Also she could say why she paid £20,835-a-year for her daughter to go to @LatymerUpper but backs a ban on independent schools. https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1177239975366184961

Presumably she wants the ban on independent schools so she can save £20,835/year.

Gallowgate said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1177166970636132352?s=20

That one has John Redwood losing his seat. Nice.

And Jess Phillips losing her seat in Yardley. Interesting.

No chance imho.

Nigel_Foremain said:

dyedwoolie said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

MarqueeMark said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/flaviblePolitic/status/1177166970636132352?s=20

Wales: Labour goes from 28 to 15 seats. Tories up to 17.

This in firebrand socialist Welsh Wales.

So very very unlikely. A lot of even middle class Welsh people I have met would rather poke their eyes out with a stick than vote Tory.

Much of the Welsh red stronghold is predicated on red rosette on a donkey votes. If that starts to fracture a la Scotland 2010, the Tories are in a solid second in many seats. Its probably a reasonable bet for a BXP gain too somewhere if they poll above about 15% nationally

I would think Plaid or LibDems more likely beneficiaries in practice. Possibly the Brexit National Party

If there are five parties between 15% and 25%, there will be a lot of very close results. It's entirely possible Labour could lose in the Valleys to the Brexit Party, to the Conservatives in the suburbs and market towns, and to the LibDems in the University and City seats.

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

The Labour vote down 27% in Wales and down 25% in London on 2017 according to YouGov, looks like following Scotland 2015 Wales and London are next up for a Labour meltdown, with only the North of England left as a real Labour heartland under Corbyn

City of Durham, Durham North West (Laura Pidcock), and Berwick (Anne-Marie Trevelyn) going Lib Dem on the Flavible projection.

OOOhhh, would love to be up for Pidcock losing her seat, even if it is to the LDs

YBarddCwsc said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Then try opening your eyes to the YouGov polling of Wales which shows much greater swings against Labour there than across GB as a whole. The last poll in late July, when the national polling picture was quite similar to that now, had the following (with changes on the GE result):
Lab 22 (-27)
Con 24 (-10)
Plaid 15 (+5)
Lib 16 (+11)
Brex 18 (+18)

By comparison, in the 2015 General Election in Scotland, the Labour vote share was down a mere 18%.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/6dmjcft8ql/Results_WelshBarometer_July2019_W.pdf

Labour were fortunate in Wales in 2017, because they could call on Carwyn Jones.

The murky events surrounding the suicide of Carl Sergeant (an actual death of a politician, instead of a hypothesised one) has left Carwyn badly damaged.

His replacement Mark Drakeford is uninspiring.

I expect Labour losses. If they can keep them to under 5, they will have done well.

(Curiously, the actual death of a politician -- as opposed to threats -- is not of any great interest to anyone. Plaid Cymru and Labour agreed yesterday that the report into his death need not be made public).

Labour drop from 29 to 15 on Flavible projections.

Rasmussen Trump 47% Biden 43%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/trump_47_biden_43

MarqueeMark said:

Yorkcity said:

JackW said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The loss of the Conservative party conference is not a matter of national importance.

Few matters are. However the opposition should have taken the high ground and allowed for a three day recess. By denying the recess they look petty and vindictive and in the mould of the man-child presently holding the position of Prime Minister.

But then they would have lost the supposed moral high ground that they just HAD to be in Westminster - and that the prorogation was the most evil thing since the invention of evil.

Because nobody missed Parliament not sitting during the LibDem and Labour Conferences, did they? So it must be down to the Tory Conference tht made the prorogation so damned EVIL.....

Yes good point , well made.
It just seems a petty decision to me, by the opposition.
Hope it does not disrupt the Conservative Conference too much.

Well at least the Americans aren't pointing at us and laughing today...
https://twitter.com/TPMLiveWire/status/1176866999789674498

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1177255121006342145

Is it just me - not sure I have ever seen him so uncomfortable as in this clip?

Or just jet-lagged......

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

A space elevator is built as follows:

Put a satellite into geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit is one that is one day long, so it appears to be fixed in the sky.
Dangle a looong wire from it until it hits the ground
Build on that wire

This means you can't build one much past geostationary orbit. Problem is, IIRC geostationary orbit is about 25k miles up in the sky, but the Moon is 250k up, so a space elevator only goes 10% of the way to the Moon. So even if one was built (and we don't have materials with compression strength to reach to geo, or tensile strength to hang from geo, without breaking, so we can't build one) it would still not go nearly far enough to the moon.

(Ps "tidally locked" means the moon always had the same side facing the Earth, not that it is in the same place in the sky. If you built a tower to the moon, it would slip off the end after only a few seconds)

Pause

I'm the only one who's ever read "Fountains of Paradise", aren't I? Is briefly glum.

Re Wales: It's also worth adding that Labour have now been running the Assembly for 22 years so it is definitely time for a change. What has kept Lab in power is that Plaid would not work with the Cons and would rather prop up Lab.

Just seen the Cummings footage on the Six O'Clock News. I'm biased, but I think that doesn't do the government any harm at all.

tlg86 said:

Just seen the Cummings footage on the Six O'Clock News. I'm biased, but I think that doesn't do the government any harm at all.

To achieve what objective? If they want to achieve a majority government it does them harm. If it wants to be popular with Brexit do or die fans it is fine.

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

HYUFD said:

Rasmussen Trump 47% Biden 43%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/trump_47_biden_43

Congressionals last year: Rasmussen GOP+1, avg of the rest: Dems +9. Result: Dems +9.

Current Presidential polling: Rasmussen Trump net+4, the rest are a spread from -8 to -16.

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

Good grief. The Act That Must Not Be Used. The only step after that is nuking London and Brighton. And you know full well Dom's got a flowchart with that as step Z...

viewcode said:

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

A space elevator is built as follows:

Put a satellite into geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit is one that is one day long, so it appears to be fixed in the sky.
Dangle a looong wire from it until it hits the ground
Build on that wire

This means you can't build one much past geostationary orbit. Problem is, IIRC geostationary orbit is about 25k miles up in the sky, but the Moon is 250k up, so a space elevator only goes 10% of the way to the Moon. So even if one was built (and we don't have materials with compression strength to reach to geo, or tensile strength to hang from geo, without breaking, so we can't build one) it would still not go nearly far enough to the moon.

(Ps "tidally locked" means the moon always had the same side facing the Earth, not that it is in the same place in the sky. If you built a tower to the moon, it would slip off the end after only a few seconds)

Pause

I'm the only one who's ever read "Fountains of Paradise", aren't I? Is briefly glum.

I think you want the centre of gravity of the whole elevator to be in the geostationary orbit. If you have a hollowed out asteroid at the top end then that won't be far above it, but it can get you a bit further out.

In any case distance is much less important than gravity in space and once you're in geostationary orbit you've done most of the work to escape Earth's gravity well and that's the main advantage of a space elevator.

Poor old Musk's rockets will be made obsolete. Eventually.

OblitusSumMe said:

viewcode said:

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

A space elevator is built as follows:

Put a satellite into geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit is one that is one day long, so it appears to be fixed in the sky.
Dangle a looong wire from it until it hits the ground
Build on that wire

This means you can't build one much past geostationary orbit. Problem is, IIRC geostationary orbit is about 25k miles up in the sky, but the Moon is 250k up, so a space elevator only goes 10% of the way to the Moon. So even if one was built (and we don't have materials with compression strength to reach to geo, or tensile strength to hang from geo, without breaking, so we can't build one) it would still not go nearly far enough to the moon.

(Ps "tidally locked" means the moon always had the same side facing the Earth, not that it is in the same place in the sky. If you built a tower to the moon, it would slip off the end after only a few seconds)

Pause

I'm the only one who's ever read "Fountains of Paradise", aren't I? Is briefly glum.

I think you want the centre of gravity of the whole elevator to be in the geostationary orbit. If you have a hollowed out asteroid at the top end then that won't be far above it, but it can get you a bit further out.

In any case distance is much less important than gravity in space and once you're in geostationary orbit you've done most of the work to escape Earth's gravity well and that's the main advantage of a space elevator.

Poor old Musk's rockets will be made obsolete. Eventually.

Of anyone is going to attempt the above it'll be Bezos or Musk lol

noneoftheabove said:

tlg86 said:

noneoftheabove said:

tlg86 said:

Just seen the Cummings footage on the Six O'Clock News. I'm biased, but I think that doesn't do the government any harm at all.

To achieve what objective? If they want to achieve a majority government it does them harm. If it wants to be popular with Brexit do or die fans it is fine.

We shall see!

Not necessarily. It may unite parliamentary support for a 2nd referendum and that is what decides Brexit, not a GE. Note not all Tory MPs voted for the Tory conference to go ahead. I wouldnt be surprised if the govt majority is today closer to -60 than -40.

If you think another referendum settles this I have a bridge to sell you.

dyedwoolie said:

I wonder what odds I could get on Tory majority, boris loses seat?

Wonder who would be Prime Minister if that happened? Javid? Raab? Rees-Mogg? Priti?

I didn't know the United States played rugby union.

IANAL.. but my brief glance at the CCA gave me the impression the Supreme Court would have to schedule some extra time for the hearing to give them a chance to stop laughing..

https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=20

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

Rasmussen Trump 47% Biden 43%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/trump_47_biden_43

So you finalise recognise Biden as the terrible candidate he is?

(Rasmussen had R+2 in their Congressional poll. It was actually D+9. That doesn't mean they're not right this time, but you do need to consider their record.)

Given Rasmussen has Trump at 53% approval Trump actually seems to do worse against Biden than he would against a generic Democrat

Byronic said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

According to the Guardian, Jo Maugham has been advised by police to wear a stab vest, and to have a panic button at home.

I feel sorry for him. And this is wrong. But really, in what world do you think you can blithely try and annul 17.4 MILLION votes, without some horrible blowback? You can’t. It’s delusional. If I tried to tell 17 million people their opinions were legally worthless, I’d expect to get the shit kicked out of me, several times, at the very least.

No one is trying to annul 17.4 million votes. Give your head a shake.

Byronic said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

According to the Guardian, Jo Maugham has been advised by police to wear a stab vest, and to have a panic button at home.

I feel sorry for him. And this is wrong. But really, in what world do you think you can blithely try and annul 17.4 MILLION votes, without some horrible blowback? You can’t. It’s delusional. If I tried to tell 17 million people their opinions were legally worthless, I’d expect to get the shit kicked out of me, several times, at the very least.

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1177244160681795584?s=20

Cyclefree said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

Here is the relevant legislation - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/36/section/19

It rather undermines the claim that all is in hand under Project Yellowhammer let alone beforehand.

Note also the statement that needs to be made under section 20(5).

Lady Hale is going to have to get her spider brooch out again, if the government goes down this route.

It is pantomine. They have no expectation of winning, probably no desire to and actually deliver no deal, but like the idea of the courts blocking them as it plays into their further division narrative.

OblitusSumMe said:

viewcode said:

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

A space elevator is built as follows:

Put a satellite into geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit is one that is one day long, so it appears to be fixed in the sky.
Dangle a looong wire from it until it hits the ground
Build on that wire

This means you can't build one much past geostationary orbit. Problem is, IIRC geostationary orbit is about 25k miles up in the sky, but the Moon is 250k up, so a space elevator only goes 10% of the way to the Moon. So even if one was built (and we don't have materials with compression strength to reach to geo, or tensile strength to hang from geo, without breaking, so we can't build one) it would still not go nearly far enough to the moon.

(Ps "tidally locked" means the moon always had the same side facing the Earth, not that it is in the same place in the sky. If you built a tower to the moon, it would slip off the end after only a few seconds)

Pause

I'm the only one who's ever read "Fountains of Paradise", aren't I? Is briefly glum.

I think you want the centre of gravity of the whole elevator to be in the geostationary orbit. If you have a hollowed out asteroid at the top end then that won't be far above it, but it can get you a bit further out.

In any case distance is much less important than gravity in space and once you're in geostationary orbit you've done most of the work to escape Earth's gravity well and that's the main advantage of a space elevator.

Poor old Musk's rockets will be made obsolete. Eventually.

I love stuff like this.
Let's feck brexit off and tell the EU we'll stay, as long as we can spunk all our spare cash on building The Space Elevator. Johnson loves a good bridge building, and he won't realise it's not a bridge, so he'll definitely be up for that.
Once it's built, we can sneak up it and nuke Westminster from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

Rasmussen Trump 47% Biden 43%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/trump_47_biden_43

So you finalise recognise Biden as the terrible candidate he is?

(Rasmussen had R+2 in their Congressional poll. It was actually D+9. That doesn't mean they're not right this time, but you do need to consider their record.)

Given Rasmussen has Trump at 53% approval Trump actually seems to do worse against Biden than he would against a generic Democrat

That's an old number. Trump's Rasmussen approval is now 49%

See: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

RobD said:

CatMan said:

https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1177228717296369664?s=20

So much for that supposed angry meltdown.

If you can't understand a figure of speech you would be better spending your time on Guido's. He can't either.

viewcode said:

OblitusSumMe said:

viewcode said:

dyedwoolie said:

Saw an interesting proposal the other day for a space elevator to the moon for a few billion quid and a massive moon mining operation for helium 3 running up and down it. The daft thing is we are only a decade away from it being a serious consideration probably!

A space elevator is built as follows:

Put a satellite into geostationary orbit. A geostationary orbit is one that is one day long, so it appears to be fixed in the sky.
Dangle a looong wire from it until it hits the ground
Build on that wire

This means you can't build one much past geostationary orbit. Problem is, IIRC geostationary orbit is about 25k miles up in the sky, but the Moon is 250k up, so a space elevator only goes 10% of the way to the Moon. So even if one was built (and we don't have materials with compression strength to reach to geo, or tensile strength to hang from geo, without breaking, so we can't build one) it would still not go nearly far enough to the moon.

(Ps "tidally locked" means the moon always had the same side facing the Earth, not that it is in the same place in the sky. If you built a tower to the moon, it would slip off the end after only a few seconds)

Pause

I'm the only one who's ever read "Fountains of Paradise", aren't I? Is briefly glum.

I think you want the centre of gravity of the whole elevator to be in the geostationary orbit. If you have a hollowed out asteroid at the top end then that won't be far above it, but it can get you a bit further out.

In any case distance is much less important than gravity in space and once you're in geostationary orbit you've done most of the work to escape Earth's gravity well and that's the main advantage of a space elevator.

Poor old Musk's rockets will be made obsolete. Eventually.

Yes, youre right about the centre of gravity, but even after saying that, it won't get you much past 10%.

I know what you mean, but... Given that Musk's business model is beating the pants off everybody else and now that the concept is proven and new designs will make new reusable rockets even more efficient, the economic justification for a space elevator is much less than before. We don't build a bridge to New York, we send planes and ships. Similarly, why build xty squillions of dollars on a 25thousand mile long bridge pointing straight up, when less than a billion will give you one flight to LEO a month (very approx).

It's only worth building the elevator once you have somewhere to go, or there's somewhere out there with stuff to send back.

Once that's the case then you can have an elevator car departing in each direction many times an hour. I don't think that sort of volume is possible with rockets.

Byronic said:

RobD said:

Byronic said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

According to the Guardian, Jo Maugham has been advised by police to wear a stab vest, and to have a panic button at home.

I feel sorry for him. And this is wrong. But really, in what world do you think you can blithely try and annul 17.4 MILLION votes, without some horrible blowback? You can’t. It’s delusional. If I tried to tell 17 million people their opinions were legally worthless, I’d expect to get the shit kicked out of me, several times, at the very least.

While I agree their motive has primarily been blocking Brexit entirely, they haven’t done anything illegal to further their aims. He shouldn’t have to live in fear for doing things allowed by law.

I said these threats are wrong. Nonetheless it is ridiculous to think you can behave this provocatively and outrageously and not expect any personal resistance.

Maugham is an out and out Revoker. His position is to say to 17 million people: shut up, butt out, your opinions are misinformed and unwanted, we are cancelling your democratic vote, and the government’s promise to honour your vote is worthless, thanks to my legal efforts.

It’s like someone walking around Luton with a Bibi Netanyahu/Star of david tee shirt. Technically and ideally it should be fine, but you’re going out of your way to inflame, and you’re a fucking dick who might get lamped, and many will say you deserved it.

If there are so many who say he deserves it, and you think it is really wrong, why dont you let the many you think exist make the point themselves?

Byronic said:

RobD said:

Byronic said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

According to the Guardian, Jo Maugham has been advised by police to wear a stab vest, and to have a panic button at home.

I feel sorry for him. And this is wrong. But really, in what world do you think you can blithely try and annul 17.4 MILLION votes, without some horrible blowback? You can’t. It’s delusional. If I tried to tell 17 million people their opinions were legally worthless, I’d expect to get the shit kicked out of me, several times, at the very least.

While I agree their motive has primarily been blocking Brexit entirely, they haven’t done anything illegal to further their aims. He shouldn’t have to live in fear for doing things allowed by law.

I said these threats are wrong. Nonetheless it is ridiculous to think you can behave this provocatively and outrageously and not expect any personal resistance.

Maugham is an out and out Revoker. His position is to say to 17 million people: shut up, butt out, your opinions are misinformed and unwanted, we are cancelling your democratic vote, and the government’s promise to honour your vote is worthless, thanks to my legal efforts.

It’s like someone walking around Luton with a Bibi Netanyahu/Star of david tee shirt. Technically and ideally it should be fine, but you’re going out of your way to inflame, and you’re a fucking dick who might get lamped, and many will say you deserved it.

Lamped is a word I haven't heard since Uni. It was a favourite of a colleague of mine

https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1177254180865462272?s=20

https://twitter.com/JunckerEU/status/1177176054827540481?s=20

https://twitter.com/NicolasSarkozy/status/1177192605802778625?s=20

https://twitter.com/MLP_officiel/status/1177206590002401280?s=20

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1177194576618172416?s=20

https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1177184106985209861?s=20

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

Rasmussen Trump 47% Biden 43%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/trump_47_biden_43

So you finalise recognise Biden as the terrible candidate he is?

(Rasmussen had R+2 in their Congressional poll. It was actually D+9. That doesn't mean they're not right this time, but you do need to consider their record.)

Given Rasmussen has Trump at 53% approval Trump actually seems to do worse against Biden than he would against a generic Democrat

That's an old number. Trump's Rasmussen approval is now 49%

See: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

So still higher than against Biden then

dyedwoolie said:

Byronic said:

RobD said:

Byronic said:

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

According to the Guardian, Jo Maugham has been advised by police to wear a stab vest, and to have a panic button at home.

I feel sorry for him. And this is wrong. But really, in what world do you think you can blithely try and annul 17.4 MILLION votes, without some horrible blowback? You can’t. It’s delusional. If I tried to tell 17 million people their opinions were legally worthless, I’d expect to get the shit kicked out of me, several times, at the very least.

While I agree their motive has primarily been blocking Brexit entirely, they haven’t done anything illegal to further their aims. He shouldn’t have to live in fear for doing things allowed by law.

I said these threats are wrong. Nonetheless it is ridiculous to think you can behave this provocatively and outrageously and not expect any personal resistance.

Maugham is an out and out Revoker. His position is to say to 17 million people: shut up, butt out, your opinions are misinformed and unwanted, we are cancelling your democratic vote, and the government’s promise to honour your vote is worthless, thanks to my legal efforts.

It’s like someone walking around Luton with a Bibi Netanyahu/Star of david tee shirt. Technically and ideally it should be fine, but you’re going out of your way to inflame, and you’re a fucking dick who might get lamped, and many will say you deserved it.

Lamped is a word I haven't heard since Uni. It was a favourite of a colleague of mine

'Lamped' is only used round here in reference to poaching.

nico67 said:

So the criminal cabal in no 10 will try and use legislation that deals with a national emergency to stop the Benn Act whilst at the same time saying no deal isn’t a problem and the country is prepared so why the emergency ?

Use of the CCA would be an unforgivable abuse of power

Gallowgate said:

🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1177268281239097344?s=21

I can't help thinking that the government hasn't got the tiniest idea of what it's going to do next month.

Worth repeating for people who think it's a "Surrender Bill"

From the Guardian (reporting what Johnson said):

"He falsely claimed that the Benn Act would give the EU the power to decide how long the UK stayed in the EU. In another interview he said:
[The act] would take away the power of this government, and the power of this country to decide how long it would remain in the EU and give that power to the EU and that’s really quite an extraordinary thing.

This is a claim that Johnson has made frequently, but it is not true. The act says, if the PM fails to pass a Brexit deal by 19 October, and if MPs have not voted for no deal, he must request a three-month extension. But it does not say the UK has to accept any length of extension it is offered by the EU. If the EU did offer a longer or shorter extension, under the legislation the PM could either accept it, or refer it to the Commons for MPs to decide. So the UK would have a choice."

I'm watching a newscaster I haven't seen before (I'm in France) and she is kippering Johnson in a way I haven't yet seen.

"Why did you lie on the side of the bus?" I...I...I...didn't and Corbyn would...."But you did. Why did you lie on the side of the bus" "...well.. well we've moved on and it wasn't a lie...." are you saying the office of national statistics lied?" "No no no..I'm saying that Corbyn didn't..."

That newscaster whose name I didn't pick up is going places! Polite firm and her questions were killers.