Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another female Jewish MP is hounded out of Labour

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another female Jewish MP is hounded out of Labour

I have made the truly agonising decision to leave the Labour Party after 55 years. I can no longer advocate voting Labour when it risks Corbyn becoming PM. I will continue to serve the people of Liverpool Riverside as I have had the honour to do since 1997. pic.twitter.com/3BTzUacZvo

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    First!
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Liverpool, not Labour. Liverpool, where Militant and the trots slung out by Neil Kinnock were readmitted by Ed Miliband (ironically, himself Jewish).
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 36,501
    edited October 2019
    Second like Remain

    EDIT third like the LibDems!
  • I'm having an enjoyable time on Twitter. Endless supply of Corbyn cultists denying the anti-semitism in front of their eyes and doing so by posting their own anti-semitism to prove there isnt any

    The absolute state of the party. Jess Phillips testing a defence for why she is still in the party. It isn't convincing
  • Another reason to block Johnson's deal is it gives McDonnell time to implement his ' Jacinda Adern ' strategy before the General Election. Ellman's move tonight only deepens the desperate need to act.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777

    Second like Remain

    EDIT third like the LibDems!

    They were the future two weeks ago once......
  • The outriders on Twitter think this is a sign that Louise Ellman is scared that Jez is going to storm to victory in the next election.

    They are beyond help, so we're just going to have to let them go the way of 'Scottish' Labour, tbh.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777
    Looking forward to Boris getting a deal - backed up with no further extensions.

    So it is Boris's Deal or No Deal. Choose, MPs.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,173

    I'm having an enjoyable time on Twitter. Endless supply of Corbyn cultists denying the anti-semitism in front of their eyes and doing so by posting their own anti-semitism to prove there isnt any

    The absolute state of the party. Jess Phillips testing a defence for why she is still in the party. It isn't convincing

    What is the defence? The movement is too important?
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584
    I was surprised there were any Jewish MPs left in Labour .
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,173
    edited October 2019
    41 party changes this year according to mr Meeks- time for a few more this year I hope. Maybe time for another ind group too.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    The outriders on Twitter think this is a sign that Louise Ellman is scared that Jez is going to storm to victory in the next election.

    Isn't that what Ellman herself is saying?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    The odd thing about Louise Ellman's move is the timing, given what appears to be a shift in power at the top of Labour in preparation for the departure of Corbyn himself. Doesn't she read the papers?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,173

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Referring to our Prime Minister as "Johnson" on Newsnight sounds pointed - and petty. I wonder if they would refer to the popular singer "Ciccone" and not thought to be a wanker?

    People moaning about him being called Boris is tiresome, and generally pretty insulting to the public for the supposed benefits it grants him, but I don't know that objecting to him being called by his last name is that different.
    I think you'd be naive to think it doesn't grant him benefits - he wouldn't have cultivated it otherwise. He is a politician who puts more effort into a carefully constructed fake persona than any other front rank UK politician. It's not even his bloody name!
    I dont buy it. I generally call him Boris and I think hes an absolute arsehole, whatever cuddly persona he had or has doesnt mean people are more disposed to him if a pundit says Boris rather than Boris Johnson or just Johnson. How stupid are people supposed to be?
    Er, have you met a lot of people?
    Not really. But I dont think there is any appreciable benefit to Boris by being called Boris. He has branded himself effectively as Boris, but that doesnt mean the brand works for everyone .

    In fairness, no to AV's strategy of 'you are too stupid to understand AV' worked, so telling people they are dumb can work.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 16,337

    The odd thing about Louise Ellman's move is the timing, given what appears to be a shift in power at the top of Labour in preparation for the departure of Corbyn himself. Doesn't she read the papers?

    She was going to lose a trigger ballot next week.

    Liverpool Riverside will have a better MP than Louise Ellman after the next GE.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    Another reason to block Johnson's deal is it gives McDonnell time to implement his ' Jacinda Adern ' strategy before the General Election. Ellman's move tonight only deepens the desperate need to act.

    Well, yes, although I'm not sure the deal passing or not makes any difference to whether we get a general election soon.

    Think Corbyn will be out before too long, though.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Referring to our Prime Minister as "Johnson" on Newsnight sounds pointed - and petty. I wonder if they would refer to the popular singer "Ciccone" and not thought to be a wanker?

    People moaning about him being called Boris is tiresome, and generally pretty insulting to the public for the supposed benefits it grants him, but I don't know that objecting to him being called by his last name is that different.
    I think you'd be naive to think it doesn't grant him benefits - he wouldn't have cultivated it otherwise. He is a politician who puts more effort into a carefully constructed fake persona than any other front rank UK politician. It's not even his bloody name!
    I dont buy it. I generally call him Boris and I think hes an absolute arsehole, whatever cuddly persona he had or has doesnt mean people are more disposed to him if a pundit says Boris rather than Boris Johnson or just Johnson. How stupid are people supposed to be?
    Er, have you met a lot of people?
    Not really. But I dont think there is any appreciable benefit to Boris by being called Boris. He has branded himself effectively as Boris, but that doesnt mean the brand works for everyone .

    In fairness, no to AV's strategy of 'you are too stupid to understand AV' worked, so telling people they are dumb can work.
    Well, I just voted "no" because PR wasn't on the menu!
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    The current seat totals for the parties (with changes since GE2017 in brackets) are:
    Conservative 288 (-29)
    Labour 244 (-18)
    SNP 35 (--)
    Liberal Democrat 19 (+7)
    DUP 10 (--)

    By way of comparison, at GE1992 the Conservatives had 336 MPs elected and had lost 12 of these by the time of the dissolution for GE1997 (losing their majority since there were 659 MPs in the Commons at the time). The changes we have seen have been monumental in size and speed, and it's particularly noteworthy that the Opposition has also lost so many MPs.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,916
    viewcode said:

    I've started to unwind my position regarding EUR->GDP as the considerable rise in sterling (~6 cents since last Friday) make it increasingly untenable. As discussed previously, bets can also provide cover but unlike currency conversion they are only loosely coupled to currency movements. Here are some bets currently available:

    Leave by Oct 31st: Yes/No
    Leave by Oct 31st with no deal: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019 with no deal: Yes/No

    Which of these bets is most closely correlated with large currency movements?

    I asked this question FPT. Would anyone care to answer it?
  • kicokico Posts: 1
    "Why do the haters go for the women?"

    They don't.

    Male MPs receive significantly more abuse than female MPs, according to research by University of Sheffield researchers, and reported by the BBC:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49247808

    What is true is that the media focuses on abuse received by female MPs. Here's an example where one person threatened four male and two female MPs, but only the abuse of female MPs was highlighted:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49211222
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I've started to unwind my position regarding EUR->GDP as the considerable rise in sterling (~6 cents since last Friday) make it increasingly untenable. As discussed previously, bets can also provide cover but unlike currency conversion they are only loosely coupled to currency movements. Here are some bets currently available:

    Leave by Oct 31st: Yes/No
    Leave by Oct 31st with no deal: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019 with no deal: Yes/No

    Which of these bets is most closely correlated with large currency movements?

    I asked this question FPT. Would anyone care to answer it?
    My guess would be the last one, on the basis that if this happens it is most likely to shake the currency. The Oct 31 date is starting to look like a lost cause regardless of what now transpires.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    The current seat totals for the parties (with changes since GE2017 in brackets) are:
    Conservative 288 (-29)
    Labour 244 (-18)
    SNP 35 (--)
    Liberal Democrat 19 (+7)
    DUP 10 (--)

    By way of comparison, at GE1992 the Conservatives had 336 MPs elected and had lost 12 of these by the time of the dissolution for GE1997 (losing their majority since there were 659 MPs in the Commons at the time). The changes we have seen have been monumental in size and speed, and it's particularly noteworthy that the Opposition has also lost so many MPs.

    It is possible that even more could leave the two main parties. I thought 1992 - 1997 was bad as you highlight. But now must be the worst since the Labour split in the 1980s. One could even go back to the 1930s.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777
    edited October 2019
    HYUFD said:
    Then leave the institutionally racist party you represent, Wes......
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If my calculations are correct the earliest date for an election at the moment would be 28th November.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,916
    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I've started to unwind my position regarding EUR->GDP as the considerable rise in sterling (~6 cents since last Friday) make it increasingly untenable. As discussed previously, bets can also provide cover but unlike currency conversion they are only loosely coupled to currency movements. Here are some bets currently available:

    Leave by Oct 31st: Yes/No
    Leave by Oct 31st with no deal: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019 with no deal: Yes/No

    Which of these bets is most closely correlated with large currency movements?

    I asked this question FPT. Would anyone care to answer it?
    My guess would be the last one, on the basis that if this happens it is most likely to shake the currency. The Oct 31 date is starting to look like a lost cause regardless of what now transpires.
    Thank you. Your guess sounds plausible.

    Does anybody else have a response?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    kico said:

    "Why do the haters go for the women?"

    They don't.

    Male MPs receive significantly more abuse than female MPs, according to research by University of Sheffield researchers, and reported by the BBC:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49247808

    What is true is that the media focuses on abuse received by female MPs. Here's an example where one person threatened four male and two female MPs, but only the abuse of female MPs was highlighted:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49211222

    Maybe the focus on female MPs recieving abuse is down to the murder of Jo Cox?

    I can think of at least two male MPs in the past couple of decades who have been attacked, one was a LD MP who was attacked with a sword and the other was a Labour MP who was stabbed. Obviously, the attempt on their lives was thwarted but does someone really need to die before abuse/violence is taken seriously?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    The current seat totals for the parties (with changes since GE2017 in brackets) are:
    Conservative 288 (-29)
    Labour 244 (-18)
    SNP 35 (--)
    Liberal Democrat 19 (+7)
    DUP 10 (--)

    By way of comparison, at GE1992 the Conservatives had 336 MPs elected and had lost 12 of these by the time of the dissolution for GE1997 (losing their majority since there were 659 MPs in the Commons at the time). The changes we have seen have been monumental in size and speed, and it's particularly noteworthy that the Opposition has also lost so many MPs.

    It is possible that even more could leave the two main parties. I thought 1992 - 1997 was bad as you highlight. But now must be the worst since the Labour split in the 1980s. One could even go back to the 1930s.
    I suppose what is particularly different this time is that both of the main parties are losing so many MPs at the same time.

    During the Major government Labour picked up a defection and a couple of by-elections from the Conservatives, so when one party was down the other was up.

    I wasn't quite following politics at the time of the formation of the SDP (as I was concentrating on learning to walk), but Wikipedia tells me only one Conservative MP left to join them, and I can also see that they lost a net two MPs due to by-elections, so that only comes to a net loss of three MPs.

    Nothing is certain, of course, and the changes of MP allegiance may not be reflected in the public at large, but there must be a chance that both Labour and the Conservatives lose seats at the next general election.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,862
    edited October 2019
    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    https://twitter.com/SKinnock/status/1184584192430084096
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,862
    edited October 2019
    AndyJS said:

    If my calculations are correct the earliest date for an election at the moment would be 28th November.

    I think 5th December is still viable until around 31st October.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    TGOHF2 said:

    I was surprised there were any Jewish MPs left in Labour .

    Those elected in 2017 were:

    Margaret Hodge, Ivan Lewis, Fabian Hamilton, Luciana Berger, Louise Ellman, Ruth Smeeth, Ed Miliband, Alex Sobel.

    https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/election-2017-winners-and-losers-on-a-night-of-drama-1.440165
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890
    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    When will the absurd Bozo pledge bite the dust .

    It’s impossible to meet the deadline even if a deal is signed off tomorrow .

    He can just say it was a negotiation tactic , whatever makes him feel better .
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    And what ingenious plan has he come up with for forcing an election, that he didn't think of a few weeks ago? :D
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,862
    edited October 2019

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was interested in Brexit anyway. ;)

    And all the Oppositions Parties campained to "respect" the referendum result which allowed the Leave vote to splinter.

    This time if there's an election people know they have to vote Boris to get Brexit done. A vote anywhere else obviously leads to Remain.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    The current seat totals for the parties (with changes since GE2017 in brackets) are:
    Conservative 288 (-29)
    Labour 244 (-18)
    SNP 35 (--)
    Liberal Democrat 19 (+7)
    DUP 10 (--)

    By way of comparison, at GE1992 the Conservatives had 336 MPs elected and had lost 12 of these by the time of the dissolution for GE1997 (losing their majority since there were 659 MPs in the Commons at the time). The changes we have seen have been monumental in size and speed, and it's particularly noteworthy that the Opposition has also lost so many MPs.

    It is possible that even more could leave the two main parties. I thought 1992 - 1997 was bad as you highlight. But now must be the worst since the Labour split in the 1980s. One could even go back to the 1930s.
    I suppose what is particularly different this time is that both of the main parties are losing so many MPs at the same time.

    During the Major government Labour picked up a defection and a couple of by-elections from the Conservatives, so when one party was down the other was up.

    I wasn't quite following politics at the time of the formation of the SDP (as I was concentrating on learning to walk), but Wikipedia tells me only one Conservative MP left to join them, and I can also see that they lost a net two MPs due to by-elections, so that only comes to a net loss of three MPs.

    Nothing is certain, of course, and the changes of MP allegiance may not be reflected in the public at large, but there must be a chance that both Labour and the Conservatives lose seats at the next general election.
    I think the loss of some seats by Tory/Labour looks highly likley, even if one of those parties 'wins'.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962
    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I've started to unwind my position regarding EUR->GDP as the considerable rise in sterling (~6 cents since last Friday) make it increasingly untenable. As discussed previously, bets can also provide cover but unlike currency conversion they are only loosely coupled to currency movements. Here are some bets currently available:

    Leave by Oct 31st: Yes/No
    Leave by Oct 31st with no deal: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019 with no deal: Yes/No

    Which of these bets is most closely correlated with large currency movements?

    I asked this question FPT. Would anyone care to answer it?
    My guess would be the last one, on the basis that if this happens it is most likely to shake the currency. The Oct 31 date is starting to look like a lost cause regardless of what now transpires.
    Thank you. Your guess sounds plausible.

    Does anybody else have a response?
    I have the opposite position to you in that I have upbets in place taken at 1.22-1.24. It didn’t reckon there was much chance of an early no deal exit, and the upbet has the consolation of compensating for the annoyance of the £ suddenly being worth more now my US trip has come to an end. I have unwound about half the position and am reflecting on the remainder, given that a bump in the road seems possible.
  • isamisam Posts: 35,492

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Had parliament prevented Brexit happening by voting down a deal before the 2017 GE?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890
    edited October 2019
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was imnterested in Brexit anyway. ;)
    They did in 2017:

    Tim Montgomerie: Triumphant Theresa is reshaping British politics

    https://capx.co/triumphant-theresa-is-reshaping-british-politics/
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,862
    Danny565 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    And what ingenious plan has he come up with for forcing an election, that he didn't think of a few weeks ago? :D
    Jezza has said he's up for it. :D
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 17,862
    edited October 2019

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was imnterested in Brexit anyway. ;)
    They did in 2017:

    Tim Montgomerie: Triumphant Theresa is reshaping British politics

    https://capx.co/triumphant-theresa-is-reshaping-british-politics/
    And then she hit the campaign trail and it all fell apart...
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I've started to unwind my position regarding EUR->GDP as the considerable rise in sterling (~6 cents since last Friday) make it increasingly untenable. As discussed previously, bets can also provide cover but unlike currency conversion they are only loosely coupled to currency movements. Here are some bets currently available:

    Leave by Oct 31st: Yes/No
    Leave by Oct 31st with no deal: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019: Yes/No
    Leave by end 2019 with no deal: Yes/No

    Which of these bets is most closely correlated with large currency movements?

    I asked this question FPT. Would anyone care to answer it?
    My guess would be the last one, on the basis that if this happens it is most likely to shake the currency. The Oct 31 date is starting to look like a lost cause regardless of what now transpires.
    Thank you. Your guess sounds plausible.

    Does anybody else have a response?
    Any No Deal, whether it is 31st of October or later will cause sterling to slide IMO. I think if the UK left with a deal the pound might rally. It is the uncertainty that weighs it down. Mind you a WA is not the end of uncertainty as the future trade and political relationship will at some point cause uncertainty. A WA unlocks a transition period but as time goes on jitters will no doubt afflict sterling.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was imnterested in Brexit anyway. ;)
    They did in 2017:

    Tim Montgomerie: Triumphant Theresa is reshaping British politics

    https://capx.co/triumphant-theresa-is-reshaping-british-politics/
    Tim Montgomerie also kept saying that Trump would not win the nomination and that he would not become POTUS! I don't buy newspapers anymore as stories are cyclical, the news tends to repeat the past with different people in the political jobs. Economies boom and bust! HMQ reigns etc...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was imnterested in Brexit anyway. ;)
    They did in 2017:

    Tim Montgomerie: Triumphant Theresa is reshaping British politics

    https://capx.co/triumphant-theresa-is-reshaping-british-politics/
    Tim Montgomerie also kept saying that Trump would not win the nomination and that he would not become POTUS! I don't buy newspapers anymore as stories are cyclical, the news tends to repeat the past with different people in the political jobs. Economies boom and bust! HMQ reigns etc...
    HMQ was suddenly looking very old entering the House of Lords.
  • Liverpool's politics appear even more messy and dark than usual, thats both its female Jewish MPs who have quit, its always had quite a macho streak and the current Labour leader of the city council big Joe Anderson certainly reflects that. For all the discussions about empowerment and grassroots Liverpool's Labour Party sort of reminds me of what the Blair et al modernisation of the Labour party was about
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 19,594
    HYUFD said:
    And is he going to do anything about it, other than tweet and wring his hands, that is?
  • There's a Rebel Alliance amendment down to the Business motion allowing Super Saturday. But I don't understand what it means !
  • The odd thing about Louise Ellman's move is the timing, given what appears to be a shift in power at the top of Labour in preparation for the departure of Corbyn himself. Doesn't she read the papers?

    She was going to lose a trigger ballot next week.

    Liverpool Riverside will have a better MP than Louise Ellman after the next GE.
    Riverside will have a Labour MP, but whether that is better is open to debate.
    I assume Ellman will stand down now, she hasn't a hope of holding the seat. I hadn't realised she was 73, so I hate to say it but seems like its time to announce you're going too.

  • Well, I just voted "no" because PR wasn't on the menu!

    I thought this was an insane way to vote.
    Yes, I wanted PR too, but baby steps. A No to AV has put voting reform back 25 years or more. There is no chance of PR anytime in next decade absent some pretty seismic shocks in British politics, and we just don't get those.... oh wait.

  • Well, I just voted "no" because PR wasn't on the menu!

    I thought this was an insane way to vote.
    Yes, I wanted PR too, but baby steps. A No to AV has put voting reform back 25 years or more. There is no chance of PR anytime in next decade absent some pretty seismic shocks in British politics, and we just don't get those.... oh wait.
    AV isn't proportional.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962

    There's a Rebel Alliance amendment down to the Business motion allowing Super Saturday. But I don't understand what it means !

    As far as I can see, it removes the one and a half hour time limit on debating amendments, and allows other amendments to be moved on the day.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,916
    @The_Taxman , @IanB2
    Thank you for your comments. Yes, I think no deal in 2019 is most closely coupled to currency movements. Thank you for your responses.
  • Looking forward to Boris getting a deal - backed up with no further extensions.

    So it is Boris's Deal or No Deal. Choose, MPs.....

    That’s not how parliamentary democracy works.
  • The odd thing about Louise Ellman's move is the timing, given what appears to be a shift in power at the top of Labour in preparation for the departure of Corbyn himself. Doesn't she read the papers?

    Maybe she thinks the problem is institutional rather than attached to a limited number of individuals?
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Referring to our Prime Minister as "Johnson" on Newsnight sounds pointed - and petty. I wonder if they would refer to the popular singer "Ciccone" and not thought to be a wanker?

    People moaning about him being called Boris is tiresome, and generally pretty insulting to the public for the supposed benefits it grants him, but I don't know that objecting to him being called by his last name is that different.
    I think you'd be naive to think it doesn't grant him benefits - he wouldn't have cultivated it otherwise. He is a politician who puts more effort into a carefully constructed fake persona than any other front rank UK politician. It's not even his bloody name!
    I dont buy it. I generally call him Boris and I think hes an absolute arsehole, whatever cuddly persona he had or has doesnt mean people are more disposed to him if a pundit says Boris rather than Boris Johnson or just Johnson. How stupid are people supposed to be?
    Er, have you met a lot of people?
    Not really. But I dont think there is any appreciable benefit to Boris by being called Boris. He has branded himself effectively as Boris, but that doesnt mean the brand works for everyone .

    In fairness, no to AV's strategy of 'you are too stupid to understand AV' worked, so telling people they are dumb can work.
    Well, I just voted "no" because PR wasn't on the menu!
    Indeed. The Lib Dems throwing away hard-won political capital by letting Cameron buy them for an AV referendum, which they never even wanted, has got to be one of the most surreal incidents in modern English politics. Only surpassed by the Lib Dems then trying to sell the turkey to voters.
  • So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Referring to our Prime Minister as "Johnson" on Newsnight sounds pointed - and petty. I wonder if they would refer to the popular singer "Ciccone" and not thought to be a wanker?

    People moaning about him being called Boris is tiresome, and generally pretty insulting to the public for the supposed benefits it grants him, but I don't know that objecting to him being called by his last name is that different.
    I think you'd be naive to think it doesn't grant him benefits - he wouldn't have cultivated it otherwise. He is a politician who puts more effort into a carefully constructed fake persona than any other front rank UK politician. It's not even his bloody name!
    I dont buy it. I generally call him Boris and I think hes an absolute arsehole, whatever cuddly persona he had or has doesnt mean people are more disposed to him if a pundit says Boris rather than Boris Johnson or just Johnson. How stupid are people supposed to be?
    Er, have you met a lot of people?
    Not really. But I dont think there is any appreciable benefit to Boris by being called Boris. He has branded himself effectively as Boris, but that doesnt mean the brand works for everyone .

    In fairness, no to AV's strategy of 'you are too stupid to understand AV' worked, so telling people they are dumb can work.
    I think being known by his first name (actually his second name, but you know what I mean) is an advantage. Who do we tend to call by their first name? Friends and family, people we are close to. It creates a sense of familiarity and informality. He is not an idiot, this is not an accident. He has a very cleverly constructed public persona, and it is more or less completely fake. Personally, I don't call people by their first name unless I know them. I just think it's fucking weird to call him Boris. He's not my mate.
  • GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    If Boris gets a deal and Parliament rejects it Boris could be on for a big win of he manages to take it to the country in a general election

    That's what Theresa May thought. Remember this poll that showed 68% of people apparently supported Brexit?

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/864023364624687104
    Theresa May wasn't "selling" a deal and nobody on the Leave side really believed she was imnterested in Brexit anyway. ;)
    They did in 2017:

    Tim Montgomerie: Triumphant Theresa is reshaping British politics

    https://capx.co/triumphant-theresa-is-reshaping-british-politics/
    And then she hit the campaign trail and it all fell apart...
    Just as it will when The Clown hits the campaign trail.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    A de facto part of the EU doesn't follow UK criminal law, UK service regulations or benefit from tariff reductions in UK trade deals
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,174
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:
    And is he going to do anything about it, other than tweet and wring his hands, that is?
    Wes being called out by. ...,. everyone below the line. May e he should follow Gapes lead
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,914
    Interesting to see the No10 and press spin machines whirr up. Johnson is presented as some sort of magician despite May having been here before.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    edited October 2019
    So after all that, not much happened yesterday?

    (Apart from Jo Maugham trying to make a prat of himself again, and Labour definitely not having an anti-Semitism problem).
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,057
    edited October 2019
    Sandpit said:

    So after all that, not much happened yesterday?

    (Apart from Jo Maugham trying to make a prat of himself again, and Labour definitely not having an anti-Semitism problem).

    And some luvvies admitting to being massive hypocrites:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10152183/extinction-rebellion-luvvies-open-letter-hypocrites/
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,568
    edited October 2019
    This deal looks worse than May’s.
    NI is trapped in some weird customs limbo —- forever, with a veto given in effect to Sinn Fein.

    It might be a profitable limbo, but it is a limbo nonetheless.

    I am desperately trying to be fair, but I don’t think I could support this.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,288
    kico said:

    "Why do the haters go for the women?"

    They don't.

    Male MPs receive significantly more abuse than female MPs, according to research by University of Sheffield researchers, and reported by the BBC:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49247808

    What is true is that the media focuses on abuse received by female MPs. Here's an example where one person threatened four male and two female MPs, but only the abuse of female MPs was highlighted:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49211222

    The far more significant statistic was that the top 10 most targeted MPs received almost half of all abuse (with David Lammy being the most abused).

    (And it is not clear what the breakdown is between actual threats of violence and ‘abuse’.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    So after all that, not much happened yesterday?

    (Apart from Jo Maugham trying to make a prat of himself again, and Labour definitely not having an anti-Semitism problem).

    And some luvvies admitting to being massive hypocrites:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10152183/extinction-rebellion-luvvies-open-letter-hypocrites/
    That’s hilarious, who on Earth had enough of a tin ear to come up with that idea?

    So we’ll continue flying around the world in First and on private planes, but the rest of you need to cut your carbon emissions to zero!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,568
    Brexit is messing with my mind.

    I just had a dream that Robert Peston joined the government as Boris’s press secretary.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Referring to our Prime Minister as "Johnson" on Newsnight sounds pointed - and petty. I wonder if they would refer to the popular singer "Ciccone" and not thought to be a wanker?

    People moaning about him being called Boris is tiresome, and generally pretty insulting to the public for the supposed benefits it grants him, but I don't know that objecting to him being called by his last name is that different.
    I think you'd be naive to think it doesn't grant him benefits - he wouldn't have cultivated it otherwise. He is a politician who puts more effort into a carefully constructed fake persona than any other front rank UK politician. It's not even his bloody name!
    I dont buy it. I generally call him Boris and I think hes an absolute arsehole, whatever cuddly persona he had or has doesnt mean people are more disposed to him if a pundit says Boris rather than Boris Johnson or just Johnson. How stupid are people supposed to be?
    Er, have you met a lot of people?
    Not really. But I dont think there is any appreciable benefit to Boris by being called Boris. He has branded himself effectively as Boris, but that doesnt mean the brand works for everyone .

    In fairness, no to AV's strategy of 'you are too stupid to understand AV' worked, so telling people they are dumb can work.
    I think being known by his first name (actually his second name, but you know what I mean) is an advantage. Who do we tend to call by their first name? Friends and family, people we are close to. It creates a sense of familiarity and informality. He is not an idiot, this is not an accident. He has a very cleverly constructed public persona, and it is more or less completely fake. Personally, I don't call people by their first name unless I know them. I just think it's fucking weird to call him Boris. He's not my mate.
    Nor is it the name that family and friends use for him - cf “Alex the Great”.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    Nigelb said:
    Of all that’s going on in the world right now, by far the most interesting is the varied interactions between the USA and China, both governmental and corporate.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 37,509
    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/27/ultimately-corbyns-got-to-compromise-on-antisemitism-or-else-risk-splitting-the-party/

    I was right, and this is going to keep hurting them until there are mass expulsions, starting with Corbyn himself.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,527
    Nigelb said:
    Russian joke:

    Optimists learn English.
    Pessimists learn Chinese.
    Realists learn how to use an AK.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996
    AndyJS said:

    If my calculations are correct the earliest date for an election at the moment would be 28th November.

    If my calculations are correct when this baby hits 88mph you’re going to see some serious shit.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777
    That should knock 5 cents off the £.

    If the DUP are not a massive currency shorting operation - then they've missed their opportunity.
  • Labour members long ago decided that having an anti-Semitic leader was more important to them than challenging for power. What’s noticeable about the hounding of female Jewish Labour MPs is that it’s happening in CLPs which are very male dominated. Mysoginy in the labour movement is nothing new. If Labour ever gets serious about electability again part of the process will be sincerely apologising to voters for inflicting Jeremy Corbyn and the far left on them. We’re a very long way from that yet.
  • “As things stand”.

    Hmmmm. I suppose it’s only rational for the DUP to squeeze everything they can out of this. If we ever leave, we should subcontract all international negotiations to them.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584
    Lols when the EU refuse an extension as no sort of deal can ever pass this parly.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mildly surprised by the timing, but not the action.

    More to follow?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    That’s the view of someone who prioritises Brexit above the union. The DUP think the other way around.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "DUP 'cannot support' Brexit deal as Johnson heads to Brussels for EU summit"

    https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-heads-for-brussels-as-brexit-deal-hangs-in-the-balance-11837315
  • MJWMJW Posts: 695
    kico said:

    "Why do the haters go for the women?"

    They don't.

    Male MPs receive significantly more abuse than female MPs, according to research by University of Sheffield researchers, and reported by the BBC:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49247808

    What is true is that the media focuses on abuse received by female MPs. Here's an example where one person threatened four male and two female MPs, but only the abuse of female MPs was highlighted:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49211222

    We're not talking about general abuse though but deselections and targeting within Labour. Sometimes the most obvious explanation is the correct one. Labour has a major problem with antisemitism and misogyny. That is not to say the party is chock full of racists and sexists, but there's a not insignificant hard left group of people who are that way. I was on the fringes of that politics when a student in Liverpool and remember seeing women occasionally shouted down by older male Marxist-types in meetings. These people used to be in the alphabet soup of Marxist groups that exist on either side of a semi-permeable membrane that is the 'Labour left' but rushed back in on Corbyn's selection.

    Of course that's not a critical mass of people, and only reaches an intolerable stage in certain CLPs, and the problem of antediluvian attitudes is not unique to Labour - it's fair to say some Tory CPs will have their own issues (hence Cameron's 'A' List), but the problem has been made more acute because in Labour that behaviour has gone unchecked because those doing it are on the 'right' side of the Corbynite/Corbynsceptic divide - and so get tacit or active support from the much larger group of people who see the battle between factions as more important than kicking out obnoxious people on their 'side'. Like a certain person lower down will excuse the horrible stuff Ellman in particular has had to put up with because she has the 'wrong' politics.

    I'd add to this that women Labour MPs often come from outside the longstanding old boy activist and union networks that see themselves as reasserting their control over 'their' party. Finally, the Jewish female Labour MPs have in particular, been more visible in raising the issue due to the nastier, intimidatory edge to the abuse they get. Because it hasn't been dealt with by the shameful people in charge of Labour, it creates a feedback loop - MP complains, seen as disloyal to the Dear Leader, gets more abuse. Nothing is done. Complains again. More abuse, targeted for deselection in favour of someone who is slavishly loyal.

    TL;DR Labour is now an utter disgrace of a party.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777
    edited October 2019
    TGOHF2 said:

    Lols when the EU refuse an extension as no sort of deal can ever pass this parly.

    Well, quite.

    Boris justs shrugs his shoulders to the DUP and says they've got all they are getting. Because the House will not go for No Deal.

    Deal by 31st looks solid.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584
    DUP have pissed on the summit’s chips big style.

    Not much point in it now.

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,568

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    If and when GB agrees an FTA with the EU, GB and NI will de facto increasingly diverge...

    NI will be trapped in a de facto EU regulatory space, and a veto handed to Sinn Fein.

    I think DUP would be mad to go for it.

    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    TGOHF2 said:

    Lols when the EU refuse an extension as no sort of deal can ever pass this parly.

    Well, quite.
    A much softer Brexit would cruise through. But first one Conservative Prime Minister sought to impose a hard Brexit and now a second has sought to impose a harder one.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 37,509

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    If and when GB agrees an FTA with the EU, GB and NI will de facto increasingly diverge...

    NI will be trapped in a de facto EU regulatory space, and a veto handed to Sinn Fein.

    I think DUP would be mad to go for it.

    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.
    Well, of course it is. It’s essentially what the EU *started out* by asking for, before she extracted several concessions with great difficulty.

    Honestly, the key difference between Johnson supporters and Corbynistas is it is possible the former might one day admit they were wrong.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    If and when GB agrees an FTA with the EU, GB and NI will de facto increasingly diverge...

    NI will be trapped in a de facto EU regulatory space, and a veto handed to Sinn Fein.

    I think DUP would be mad to go for it.

    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.
    Nope, it isn’t: it’s better.

    It’s just the Remainers now sense it as a threat so want to pre-emptively sledge it.

    We all know the game.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    That’s the view of someone who prioritises Brexit above the union. The DUP think the other way around.

    That’s not true either.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,527



    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.

    Why the fuck did BJ agree to it? He must have known the DUP would tell him to stick it. Was he forced into trying it due to his paraphilia for 31st Oct?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    ydoethur said:

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    If and when GB agrees an FTA with the EU, GB and NI will de facto increasingly diverge...

    NI will be trapped in a de facto EU regulatory space, and a veto handed to Sinn Fein.

    I think DUP would be mad to go for it.

    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.
    Well, of course it is. It’s essentially what the EU *started out* by asking for, before she extracted several concessions with great difficulty.

    Honestly, the key difference between Johnson supporters and Corbynistas is it is possible the former might one day admit they were wrong.
    No chance on either front. They’re all Ellen Jamesians.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,568

    So:

    NI would be de jure part of the UK, but de facto part of the EU.

    The DUP are going to have a canary.
    That’s not what it says at all.

    It seems a reasonable compromise to me and the EU have made a series of meaningful concessions there.

    The DUP would be mad not to take it.
    If and when GB agrees an FTA with the EU, GB and NI will de facto increasingly diverge...

    NI will be trapped in a de facto EU regulatory space, and a veto handed to Sinn Fein.

    I think DUP would be mad to go for it.

    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.
    Nope, it isn’t: it’s better.

    It’s just the Remainers now sense it as a threat so want to pre-emptively sledge it.

    We all know the game.
    Sure, but I am not Jolyon Maugham et al.
    I would honestly like to know why you think this is better.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,777

    TGOHF2 said:

    Lols when the EU refuse an extension as no sort of deal can ever pass this parly.

    Well, quite.
    A much softer Brexit would cruise through. But first one Conservative Prime Minister sought to impose a hard Brexit and now a second has sought to impose a harder one.
    The EU are at the point of wanting it done. No more extensions gets it done. With no risk of No Deal.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 12,240
    There's nothing new anymore in Brexit. With Johnson's Deal we're back to the interim Deal of December 2017, two years wasted and all trust gone.

    I confess I expected the interim Deal to pass back then. There were reasons why it didn't and those reasons haven't gone away.

    One big reason is it's interim. We have to accept detailed concessions on Ireland while not knowing what will be arranged long term. There's a vague FTA doing heavy lifting in this agreement. We don't know anything about it, except it won't be low obligation and quickly agreed, as the Johnson regime claims it will be. What it actually will be, if it happens at all (No permanent Deal is still a possibility), will have a huge effect on the acceptability of the Irish arrangements to the DUP and others.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 37,509
    Dura_Ace said:



    I know you and I disagree violently about Brexit, but I honestly think this is “worse” than May’s deal.

    Why the fuck did BJ agree to it?
    I still think we should seriously consider the possibility it’s because he’s an idiot.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,923

    TGOHF2 said:

    Lols when the EU refuse an extension as no sort of deal can ever pass this parly.

    Well, quite.
    A much softer Brexit would cruise through. But first one Conservative Prime Minister sought to impose a hard Brexit and now a second has sought to impose a harder one.
    The EU are at the point of wanting it done. No more extensions gets it done. With no risk of No Deal.
    So, the EU refuse an extension then the DUP vote against - and there's no risk of No Deal?
    Can you explain that again?
This discussion has been closed.