I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
The problem is Swinson is getting shit from all sides. And is still copping flak for the coalition years, which is very telling. Very little support for her here.
Feel sorry for her.
But more important is how five million people see her at home.
She’s knocked the shrillness on the head, appeared reasonable and open in admitting coalition mistakes - and against some grumpy Corbynites who look like they’ve been sucking lemons, she’s put up a good show for the Waitrose classes in the south.
She will appeal to the diehard Remainers, a clear stop Brexit plan opposed to Corbyn's Brexit neutrality.
However her record in the Coalition means the left will never vote for her
The Corbyn loyalists won’t. But that leaves a lot of Blairite Labour up for grabs.
I’m still amazed at the hate LibDems get for the coalition. They had a seventh of the seats and could only expect a seventh of the influence. I’d say they probably got that (and given what’s come since can reasonably argue they had a restraining influence on the right wing of the Tories (albeit that this was useful for Cameron).
Tripling tuition fees when they could have stopped it.
They also had a rapid conversion to supporting Middle Eastern warmongering.
When the Government set in train legislation to equalise pension ages, some women ended up drawing pensions later than they otherwise would have. Some of them formed the group "Women Against State Pension Inequality" to campaign against it. The acronym is WASPI.
Women against state pension age increase if you are between about 58 and 68 you have had your long time financial planning changed. It’s ‘cost’ us about 35,000 plus four years of private health insurance about £12,000 but fortunately we could cope without it many others have struggled.
Not sure what that means. Because they genuinely think he's going to win and what to hear what his plans actually are, or, just because they're keeping their powder dry.
Women against state pension age increase if you are between about 58 and 68 you have had your long time financial planning changed. It’s ‘cost’ us about 35,000 plus four years of private health insurance about £12,000 but fortunately we could cope without it many others have struggled.
Not sure what that means. Because they genuinely think he's going to win and what to hear what his plans actually are, or, just because they're keeping their powder dry.
Or because they’re struggling to pick out actual facts from the word soup he emits 😆
I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
And LD leavers like myself were effectively forced out.
Not sure what that means. Because they genuinely think he's going to win and what to hear what his plans actually are, or, just because they're keeping their powder dry.
Or because they’re struggling to pick out actual facts from the word soup he emits 😆
I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
Revoke was certainly not forced upon Swinson; it was her initiative and she did her best to steamroller it through conference. Even then, there was a big minority who wanted the Revoke lines taken out of the conference motion on Brexit to be separately debated, even with the minimal notice for the motion and the refusal to entertain potential amendments, as well as getting all the Party big guns to speak in favour. There were two votes on the Anti-Brexit amendment: the first (on separating out the Revoke lines) was won by about 60-40; the second was on the motion as a whole when that failed, and most people swung into line (as to vote against at that point would be to vote against the entire stance, inclusive of the referendum-if-no-majority lines). It was the latter that was the only one reported.
Not sure what that means. Because they genuinely think he's going to win and what to hear what his plans actually are, or, just because they're keeping their powder dry.
Or because they’re struggling to pick out actual facts from the word soup he emits 😆
I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
And LD leavers like myself were effectively forced out.
"He's here! He's here, everybody! Over here!"
(In the distance the helicopter searchlights wheel towards the noise... )
I've got a lot of respect for Swinson after that. I think it was a horrendous audience for her but she categorically refused to go dow the Labour light adjunct
I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
Revoke was certainly not forced upon Swinson; it was her initiative and she did her best to steamroller it through conference. Even then, there was a big minority who wanted the Revoke lines taken out of the conference motion on Brexit to be separately debated, even with the minimal notice for the motion and the refusal to entertain potential amendments, as well as getting all the Party big guns to speak in favour. There were two votes on the Anti-Brexit amendment: the first (on separating out the Revoke lines) was won by about 60-40; the second was on the motion as a whole when that failed, and most people swung into line (as to vote against at that point would be to vote against the entire stance, inclusive of the referendum-if-no-majority lines). It was the latter that was the only one reported.
I didn't say it was forced on the party, but rather that the large number of new members have changed the nature of the party.
It's QT. Virtually every episode is broadcast from a Labour seat. (I'd love to see the exact figures but I suspect 90%ish over the last 20 years)
I guess that's because large towns and cities tend to be more Labour.
I do think audiences on QT, on a whole, are f***ing abysmal. The sort of people who go to these kind of things tend to be rather angry, partisan people, who aren't interested in hearing an answer - they just want to make a point. I'd far, far rather listen to a good interviewer.
Sid Vicious was absolutely right on the subject of the man on the street.
I've got a lot of respect for Swinson after that. I think it was a horrendous audience for her but she categorically refused to go dow the Labour light adjunct
I do think revoke has backfired and the only chance of it succeeding was if Johnson didn’t get a deal and the election was being fought with that v Remain .
I think she got a boner when she saw the 6 million signatures on the Revoke petition.
It was a lot of people expressing their desire to reverse Brexit but she took it literally.
A significant majority of LD members joined since the referendum, and often specifically to Remain. The party wanted the Revoke policy. I agree that any policy that is as difficult to explain on the doorstep is bad as a leading policy. It is like the hubris of stating she could be PM, technically true but ridiculously unlikely.
And LD leavers like myself were effectively forced out.
"He's here! He's here, everybody! Over here!"
(In the distance the helicopter searchlights wheel towards the noise... )
Once upon a time there were many such people. Consider the traditional heartland of liberalism in tge Eurosceptic south west. I remember hearing a vox pop at tge 1997 GE of a LD voter who justified his choice on the grounds that they were the only party who would stand up to Europe.
Comments
Dodged the Russia question.
https://www.waspi.co.uk
They also had a rapid conversion to supporting Middle Eastern warmongering.
Not sure what that means. Because they genuinely think he's going to win and what to hear what his plans actually are, or, just because they're keeping their powder dry.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/10/28/the-persistence-of-lack-of-memory-how-the-state-retirement-age-was-changed-and-communicated/
I think Boris is quite good here.
Even if I would say that.
Hardly a high bar. Not really a bar at all.
Lying over the Russia report now.
Plus has facts on home building.
What's he been taking??
Boris is a racist question now.
On 'people like me'.
There were two votes on the Anti-Brexit amendment: the first (on separating out the Revoke lines) was won by about 60-40; the second was on the motion as a whole when that failed, and most people swung into line (as to vote against at that point would be to vote against the entire stance, inclusive of the referendum-if-no-majority lines). It was the latter that was the only one reported.
But I suspect it's much better reading PB comments.
He's just not doing badly enough.
You've admitted you think he's a total twat, so that wasn't a given at all!
(In the distance the helicopter searchlights wheel towards the noise... )
I do think audiences on QT, on a whole, are f***ing abysmal. The sort of people who go to these kind of things tend to be rather angry, partisan people, who aren't interested in hearing an answer - they just want to make a point. I'd far, far rather listen to a good interviewer.
Sid Vicious was absolutely right on the subject of the man on the street.
VI going down quicker than a Beoing 737 Max
Your not even voting LD in Bassetlaw are you?