Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

How the papers are Johnson and Sunak’s lockdown fines – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • Corbyn and Johnson are just as bad as each other
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,664
    edited April 2022
    Morning all.

    French Election soundite: Macron pledged to increase the retirement age from 62 to 65, amongst others. What were his voter demographics?

    His programme is a further demonstration of his "neither left, nor right" political positioning that borrows from both sides of the traditional divide in politics.

    From the right wing, there are promises of more tax cuts for companies, thousands of new police officers and judges, and a rise in the retirement age to 65 from 62 in order to cut the pension system's massive debt.

    "I take responsibility for telling you that yes: we need to work longer," he said at his first campaign rally last weekend.

    From the left, he proposes raising the minimum level of pensions, new recruits for the health service, and a promise to make gender equality and tackling school harassment a priority.


    https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220410-french-presidency-what-are-macron-and-le-pen-promising
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620

    The Queen can't break the law, it's her law.
    Nonsense. Charles I discovered that.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,814
    A question to those still obsessed with this. If it were found that HM ER2 had broken lockdown rules, which she had personally signed into law, should she have to abdicate?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,507
    tlg86 said:

    Every one who has put their name to that STW statement is a traitor.

    Don't be ridiculous. We aren't at war with anyone so how can this be relevant. There was a lot of people before ww2 who counselled and called for us to stay out of it. It is called democracy and not living in a big brother dictatorship.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,705
    Carnyx said:

    Nonsense. Charles I discovered that.
    There would then have to be an uprising. As it stands she can't break the law.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,553
    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    52m
    Also worth remembering what Rishi Sunak was angrily briefing out over the weekend. "Divulging the tax status of a private individual is a criminal offence". OK. But presumably not a sacking or resigning offence now...

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1514138878520827904
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,814

    Don't be ridiculous. We aren't at war with anyone so how can this be relevant. There was a lot of people before ww2 who counselled and called for us to stay out of it. It is called democracy and not living in a big brother dictatorship.
    Lots of people seem very sure that we aren’t at war. Sounds like a game of semantics to me. Certainly feels to me a lot like we are.

    Whether that means it’s the right or wrong time to have a Tory leadership question is an entirely separate question. For what it’s worth I don’t see how BJ stepping down and a new leader stepping up would change much.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,553
    Maybe this is why Sunak didn't strike and bring Johnson down when all this first broke months ago?

    He knew he was in the frame as well.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620
    edited April 2022
    moonshine said:

    A question to those still obsessed with this. If it were found that HM ER2 had broken lockdown rules, which she had personally signed into law, should she have to abdicate?

    Oh yes. Unless you plead that HM has no personal responsibility. Which is (a) incredible after indyref1 and Mr Cameron's indiscretions, and (to some extent) also the revelations about PoW/DoR's interference in legislation, and (b) raises serious questions aabout the reality of the UK constitution.

    HMtQ is also head of the C of E. Her uncle was kicked out for breaching its ethics, remember.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    tlg86 said:

    Every one who has put their name to that STW statement is a traitor.

    Are you alright?

    Genuine question. Your posts across various topics have got quite angry, recently.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,463
    ping said:

    Are you alright?

    Genuine question. Your posts across various topics have got quite angry, recently.
    You mean bonkers?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620
    TOPPING said:

    There would then have to be an uprising. As it stands she can't break the law.
    The uprising was necessary to get him into a court of law, where he was prosecuted and convicted according to the law of the land.
  • moonshine said:

    Lots of people seem very sure that we aren’t at war. Sounds like a game of semantics to me. Certainly feels to me a lot like we are.

    Whether that means it’s the right or wrong time to have a Tory leadership question is an entirely separate question. For what it’s worth I don’t see how BJ stepping down and a new leader stepping up would change much.
    It would not change anything but the only way for it to work is that the conservative mps agree a coronation candidate or Boris resigns but stays in post until his successor is elected

    Either are fine by me
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,324
    Grant Shapps on Sky News looks like he's been crying. Take a wheatgrass shot ever time he says "move on".
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    moonshine said:

    A question to those still obsessed with this. If it were found that HM ER2 had broken lockdown rules, which she had personally signed into law, should she have to abdicate?

    Legally, no, because the theory is she makes but is not subject to the law

    In practice it would be a question for the mood of the public and - crucially - in normal times the advice of the PM. So here's another excellent constitutional reason not to have a lying criminal phatboi in no 10 because where would his authority be?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620
    Dura_Ace said:

    Grant Shapps on Sky News looks like he's been crying. Take a wheatgrass shot ever time he says "move on".

    Oh, is that the name for some new specialist sexual perversion or something? 'Wheatgrass shot' I mean, not 'Grant Shapps'.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,690
    Good morning!

    Two points:

    1. I guess Rishi Rich is more secure in post this morning. How could Bozo sack the other bloke who has been fined, and stay in post himself?

    2. Inflation - ouch! But at least the BBC website has been able to use a picture of an attractive woman filling up with diesel to illustrate the story. So that makes it easier to deal with.
  • It would not change anything but the only way for it to work is that the conservative mps agree a coronation candidate or Boris resigns but stays in post until his successor is elected

    Either are fine by me
    Johnson is doing well enough to fight the next election now especially if Labour undeperforms in the local elections. The Conservative Party could do without fairweather supporters like you.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,507
    Fishing said:

    Sure, but he's lied numerous times before and he hasn't resigned or been fired. As have numerous other politicians, including Starmer. So, again, I think it's worrying, but not sufficient for him to resign. If I were his boss, I might give him a verbal warning for it, not sack him, if that analogy makes sense.

    Raising taxes when he explicitly said he wouldn't, on the other hand, I think is sufficient for him to resign. It's a lie that actually matters to people, rather than one about whether he attended a party in his own garden, which doesn't. But he didn't resign, and few seriously called on him to do so iirc.
    Can you remind me when Starmer lied or at least inadvertently made a mistake?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751
    TOPPING said:

    There would then have to be an uprising. As it stands she can't break the law.
    The same applies to most heads of state.

    https://www.law.ac.uk/resources/blog/what-would-happen-if-the-queen-went-on-a-crime-spree/
    ...There are many kinds of immunity in public international law, and the overlapping relationship between them baffles LLB students and judges alike: see, for example, Pinochet no 2 (1999), in which Lord Browne-Wilkinson was so out of his depth the judgment reads like a transcript from a Liz Truss select committee appearance.

    In our Queen-on-a-rampage scenario, however, all the alleged crimes have been committed at home. Therefore, while international law might still help us later, our starting point is a related legal principle in domestic law, sovereign immunity.

    Sovereign immunity is a customary principle, under which the Queen and the criminal law simply don’t mix. It was last tested in court in 1911, when King George V was accused of bigamy: the Lord Chief Justice decided that the King could not be ordered to give evidence, and that was the end of that...


    But customary principles don't easily survive if they are breached gratuitously, which happily in the present monarch's case is highly unlikely.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,386
    DougSeal said:

    I hate STW (aka the SWP rebadged for people who shop at Waitrose) but this is out of date - the statement you link to is dated 18 February. The war began (or at least it’s current incarnation started) on 24 February. So it’s not perhaps surprising that there is not much space devoted to the Russian occupation.
    I'm unsure that is of any relevance. Everyone knew the war was going to occur, and STW's website currently does not look much different.

    Here's the strapline at the top of the website: "We’re calling on the British government to stop talking up war in Ukraine and give its support to a negotiated peace by backing the peace proposals now being discussed by Ukrainian President Zelensky and his Russian counterparts…"

    "talking up the war."

    It's our fault, apparently.

    Note there's no call for Russia to pull out of Ukraine: the easiest way for this war to be stopped.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,823
    Off topic, been reading some well researched data on the main driver of inflation (petrol prices) and it really does seem there has been a dereliction of duty by the CMA. There are now far, far too few major forecourt operators which has allowed margins to rise well beyond the standard 1-2% that is normal for an ultra high volume product.

    The Issa brothers should never have been allowed to buy Asda, consolidation of a major market discounter has meant higher average margins and significantly slower average price drops.

    While they were fannying about trying to get Facebook to sell Giphy, something no one gives a fuck about, they've allowed forecourt owners to eliminate any serious competitors and pump up their margins and rip off the whole nation.

    One simple move would be the remerger of Asda and it's forecourts and then turning TPG/Issa into forces sellers of Asda. Potentially breaking up their forecourt empire into two or three as well.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    The “we can’t change leader in a war” thing is obviously nonsense. Tory MPs have had a look at the alternative leaders and decided, for now, that their own interests are best served with this PM. A lack of obvious successor is what’s keeping show on the road, war is a fig leaf.

    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1514152983835119621
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792
    Carnyx said:

    You are HYUFD and I claim my 5p.
    Is that an inflatory adjustment if you are being paid in Rubles?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Good morning!

    Two points:

    1. I guess Rishi Rich is more secure in post this morning. How could Bozo sack the other bloke who has been fined, and stay in post himself?

    2. Inflation - ouch! But at least the BBC website has been able to use a picture of an attractive woman filling up with diesel to illustrate the story. So that makes it easier to deal with.

    And is her car fully electric?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,690

    I really would not want to be a conservative candidate in this situation
    They should stand as independents. like your chap.


    (Joke!)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620

    Is that an inflatory adjustment if you are being paid in Rubles?
    No, just a reflection of the rarity of Tory defenders of Mr Johnson these days.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771
    Carnyx said:

    Oh, is that the name for some new specialist sexual perversion or something? 'Wheatgrass shot' I mean, not 'Grant Shapps'.
    I enjoyed the tweet yesterday that suggested any phrase of the form GERUND + ANIMAL is a suitable euphemism for self love.

    e.g. Crowning the Ocelot; Jumping the Otter.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,030
    edited April 2022

    Johnson is doing well enough to fight the next election now especially if Labour undeperforms in the local elections. The Conservative Party could do without fairweather supporters like you.
    Are you @HYUFD or are you being coached by him

    And by the way if you lose conservatives like me then the party is out of office for decades

  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,507
    Carnyx said:

    You are HYUFD and I claim my 5p.
    PB tories are working hard today attempting to spin and pulling a hell of a lot of wool over many peoples eyes, conflating the eating of cake with misleading parliament.

  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771

    Are you @HYUFD or are you being coached by him

    "The Conservative Party could do without fairweather supporters like you."

    Those "fairweather supporters" are more normally called "voters" and are somewhat essential to a party of government, as our system is currently constituted.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,557

    PB tories are working hard today attempting to spin and pulling a hell of a lot of wool over many peoples eyes, conflating the eating of cake with misleading parliament.

    Well, TBF they must be feeling a bit sheepish for having wished a criminal PM on us.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594
    Scott_xP said:

    I am not naive enough to think that honour determines politics but I am surprised by how few Tories mourn the death of the Ministerial Code or feel a sense of foreboding that future Prime Ministers may mislead Parliament or break the law without consequence. There will be a cost.
    https://twitter.com/theobertram/status/1514129924084404229

    A cost paid by us, not them. Why would that bother them? Now is all that matters.
  • They should stand as independents. like your chap.


    (Joke!)
    You malign our independent candidate who is not a conservative or conservative leaning but it is a good point if a bit too late

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,277
    Dura_Ace said:

    Grant Shapps on Sky News looks like he's been crying. Take a wheatgrass shot ever time he says "move on".

    He is still pissed off he was not invited to any of the parties.....
  • DoubleDutchDoubleDutch Posts: 161
    If the Conservatives do not ditch Johnson then the voters will ditch them.

    It is not complicated.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,079

    Are you @HYUFD or are you being coached by him

    And by the way if you lose conservatives like me then the party is out of office for decades

    Last time you went Labour, when you voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001, it was 13 years out of power. Not exactly decades
  • HYUFD said:

    Last time you went Labour, when you voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001, it was 13 years out of power. Not exactly decades
    That is quite funny to be fair
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,594
    Carnyx said:

    Nonsense. Charles I discovered that.
    Legally a questionable decision, although as argued in The Tyrannicide Brief, it was still closer to what we'd call an attempt at a fair trial than most got, and definitely fairer than the regicide got.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,463
    Nick Robinson interviewing Michael Green about dishonesty. A must listen. Nick Robinson gets better with time. I'd give him LK's job though I know he has health issues.

    At about 2.10 0nwards.......

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00168b3
  • DoubleDutchDoubleDutch Posts: 161
    Nigelb said:

    What country on the planet has been "whiter than white" ?
    .
    It is also not a very acceptable phrase nowadays. White = purity and good. Black = darkness and evil.

    Not really kosher in this day and age. Plenty of alternatives.

    Choice of language often says a lot about a person.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,507
    edited April 2022

    It is also not a very acceptable phrase nowadays. White = purity and good. Black = darkness and evil.

    Not really kosher in this day and age. Plenty of alternatives.

    Choice of language often says a lot about a person.
    or even the use of the word kosher in a general not specifically Jewish situation perhaps?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    It is also not a very acceptable phrase nowadays. White = purity and good. Black = darkness and evil.

    Not really kosher in this day and age. Plenty of alternatives.

    Choice of language often says a lot about a person.
    You think black and white should be haram?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,535
    Carnyx said:

    You are HYUFD and I claim my 5p.
    HYUFD's posts have far more imagination, although the last sentence was rather familiar.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,079
    algarkirk said:

    Good question. And they might go for Ref2 as a policy. It may gain votes and perhaps not lose a lot.

    The case for status quo unionism is thin, and has been for years. In a secular age there is no decent case for the island of Ireland not being unified, and Brexit amplifies this. But the Ireland border problem emphasises how difficult the Scottish/English border problem would be if it became an EU border. (I can see Scotland from where I live so am biased, but it is still objectively true).

    The border, currency and economy issues make it impossible (IMHO) that a Ref2 can be won by the Nats. But it would be a lengthy and divisive distraction.

    Tactically (and I want Labour to lead the next government, I thing I have not wanted for decades) allowing Ref2 would probably be the best policy, on the private basis that it coud not win, especially if Labour were in power.

    And after RefBrexit obvs nothing could possibly go wrong.

    There is in the sense that more Northern Irish voters still vote for Unionist and Nationalist parties. While every MP from county Antrim for example, the largest Northern Irish county, is DUP.

    As for Scotland an indyref2 is only likely if Labour need SNP support to get into power after the next general election
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,156

    Maybe this is why Sunak didn't strike and bring Johnson down when all this first broke months ago?

    He knew he was in the frame as well.

    Maybe Sunak is playing a really really cunning long game (ok this isn’t totally serious)…..

    How about he knew that his family tax affairs were a big problem for him and also realised he was likely to get a FPN. He also knew that if he was getting a FPN then Boris would too and also he’s absolutely certain Ukraine is going to kick off.

    He doesn’t jump ship and depose Boris but decides to stay but slightly distant.

    He puts out a spring statement that doesn’t really do much but crucially doesn’t use up ammunition - if everything is shit then everything is shit right now anyway.

    He then ensures his tax situation gets out during Ukraine.

    He is now in a position where Boris can’t dump him because he can jump first and claim moral high-ground over Boris over parties which damages Boris further. He can claim (true or not) that Boris stopped various measures he wanted to introduce in spring statement etc. Boris is stuck with Rishi.

    He now potentially, if Boris holds on for a while, is in a position where he can then use the ammunition he saved in Spring statement for a big budget in Autumn where people are thinking about heating bills etc more as it gets colder.

    By then Ukraine effects could have died down and he can announce spending splurge as country’s finances are in a better state six months on.

    His tax situation will be fish and chip wrapping and he can say “I should have done it differently but when I realised how unfair it was my wife immediately changed her tax situation because we want to contribute to this amazing country as best we can blah blah blah.”

    Boris leads Tories to a narrow win at next election, fulfils personal political aims and then steps down.

    Rehabilitated Rishi having managed the country’s finances prudently despite calls to spend earlier is the darling of sound money Tory backbenchers and walks into the top job.

    Again not altogether seriously likely however it’s also a possibility.
  • That is quite funny to be fair
    You voted Conservative in 2019 when Johnson was leader. Johnson has not changed at all so why don't you support him now?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,942
    tlg86 said:

    Yep, and we can call them out for what they are.
    Indeed you can. And did.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,364
    mwadams said:

    "The Conservative Party could do without fairweather supporters like you."

    Those "fairweather supporters" are more normally called "voters" and are somewhat essential to a party of government, as our system is currently constituted.
    "Why don't you naff off and join the other lot?"
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,664
    edited April 2022
    moonshine said:

    Lots of people seem very sure that we aren’t at war. Sounds like a game of semantics to me. Certainly feels to me a lot like we are.

    Whether that means it’s the right or wrong time to have a Tory leadership question is an entirely separate question. For what it’s worth I don’t see how BJ stepping down and a new leader stepping up would change much.
    Formally, we aren't at war. It's also noteworthy that the statement is dated Fab 18th ie *before* the latest invasion.

    Perhaps "useful idiot" is a better term for the likes of Corbyn and Webbe, who is the only other MP remaining on that statement, for now - the other 11(?) having withdrawn their signatures. Though I think it is perhaps too kind.

    The likes of Galloway are in my view more cynical.

    In his speech at the STWC online rally around that time which I listened to, Corbyn was explicitly blaming "the NATO build up in Ukraine", which was entirely fictional. But that's hardly a surprise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751

    I'm unsure that is of any relevance. Everyone knew the war was going to occur, and STW's website currently does not look much different.

    Here's the strapline at the top of the website: "We’re calling on the British government to stop talking up war in Ukraine and give its support to a negotiated peace by backing the peace proposals now being discussed by Ukrainian President Zelensky and his Russian counterparts…".
    They appear not to have noticed the complete incompatibility of the two sides' peace proposals.
    Nor that Putin has announced that the talks are over because of the UK/Ukraine "provocation" in Bucha...
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771

    That is quite funny to be fair
    It's interesting that 13 years out of power after 18 years *in* power still seems like a longer period than Labour's (minimum) 13-15 years out of power, after 13 years in power. Certainly it doesn't feel like 12 years since the last Labour government (which is, to some extent, what allows Johnson's administration to continue to blame them for everything.)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,812
    This scandal is simultaneously outrageous and boring. It’s OMG and Yawn

    I can see Boris surviving, quite easily, out of voter apathy

    Is anyone out there really boiling with anger? I doubt it. It’s like a car crash filmed in such ultra-slow-motion you lose interest
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792
    Nigelb said:

    And Corbyn would likely have prevented it.
    Oh my God, I thought you were a more intelligent poster. You think Putin would have listened to Mr Thicky? ffs! That is one of the most ridiculous posts I have seen on here
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,630

    Good morning!

    Two points:

    1. I guess Rishi Rich is more secure in post this morning. How could Bozo sack the other bloke who has been fined, and stay in post himself?

    2. Inflation - ouch! But at least the BBC website has been able to use a picture of an attractive woman filling up with diesel to illustrate the story. So that makes it easier to deal with.

    Weirdly she seems to be smiling too. Must have a voucher.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,507
    ydoethur said:

    Well, TBF they must be feeling a bit sheepish for having wished a criminal PM on us.
    ewe have a good point there.

    :smiley:
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,677

    I'm unsure that is of any relevance. Everyone knew the war was going to occur, and STW's website currently does not look much different.

    Here's the strapline at the top of the website: "We’re calling on the British government to stop talking up war in Ukraine and give its support to a negotiated peace by backing the peace proposals now being discussed by Ukrainian President Zelensky and his Russian counterparts…"

    "talking up the war."

    It's our fault, apparently.

    Note there's no call for Russia to pull out of Ukraine: the easiest way for this war to be stopped.
    I'm not a STW fan but your post prompted me to have a look. Reading the piece behind the strapline I see

    "President Zelensky has outlined the two most essential conditions of peace: that the invading Russian troops withdraw from Ukraine and that the Ukraine will become a neutral country, not a member of NATO. These terms are the basis of an agreement, according to Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

    We welcome these developments as the necessary first steps to ending the bloodshed, allowing refugees to return to their homes, and ending the economic damage being done to the livelihoods of ordinary working people both in the combatant states are [sic] around the globe."

    That is not a particularly outrageous view, and certainly not treason. I agree that it doesn't explicitly assign blame and the statement is pretty naively optimistic about the peace talks but citing Zelensky approvingly and calling it a Russian invasion is reasonably clear.

    https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/ukraine-peace-now/
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,030
    edited April 2022

    You voted Conservative in 2019 when Johnson was leader. Johnson has not changed at all so why don't you support him now?
    I think Boris has done well on covid and Ukraine, less so on Brexit but when my grandchildren ask

    'Papa, has the Prime Minister lied'

    Then my answer is 'yes but he has accepted responsibility and resigned which is the right thing to do'

    I cannot say that at present

    And by the way I have not only voted conservative at every selection since 1964, apart from 97 and 01, but I have been an active campaigner for the party at many of those elections
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771
    Leon said:

    This scandal is simultaneously outrageous and boring. It’s OMG and Yawn

    I can see Boris surviving, quite easily, out of voter apathy

    Is anyone out there really boiling with anger? I doubt it. It’s like a car crash filmed in such ultra-slow-motion you lose interest

    As I say downthread, it's more a "fuck that, I'm not getting off my arse for that clown" come election time, rather than "MAKE WAY, I'M VOTING FOR THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS, THE LAST BASTION OF RIGHTOUSNESS, TO SMITE THESE WRONGDOERS".
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,364

    You voted Conservative in 2019 when Johnson was leader. Johnson has not changed at all so why don't you support him now?
    "You should have known that he was a nasty piece of work all along. Keep voting Conservative."

    I suppose it's worth a try as a campaign slogan.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792
    Leon said:

    This scandal is simultaneously outrageous and boring. It’s OMG and Yawn

    I can see Boris surviving, quite easily, out of voter apathy

    Is anyone out there really boiling with anger? I doubt it. It’s like a car crash filmed in such ultra-slow-motion you lose interest

    Depends who you didn't get to see when they were dying during lockdown. You love The Clown, so you desperately want people to think it unimportant, in the same way that those who are loyal to Putin believe in "denazification" or any other such nonsensical bollox that they are told to believe by their great leader. It is called being gullible.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 51,269
    MattW said:

    Morning all.

    French Election soundite: Macron pledged to increase the retirement age from 62 to 65, amongst others. What were his voter demographics?

    His programme is a further demonstration of his "neither left, nor right" political positioning that borrows from both sides of the traditional divide in politics.

    From the right wing, there are promises of more tax cuts for companies, thousands of new police officers and judges, and a rise in the retirement age to 65 from 62 in order to cut the pension system's massive debt.

    "I take responsibility for telling you that yes: we need to work longer," he said at his first campaign rally last weekend.

    From the left, he proposes raising the minimum level of pensions, new recruits for the health service, and a promise to make gender equality and tackling school harassment a priority.


    https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220410-french-presidency-what-are-macron-and-le-pen-promising

    Good God! An politician being honest about making difficult decisions in the nations interest. It will never catch on here.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,535

    You voted Conservative in 2019 when Johnson was leader. Johnson has not changed at all so why don't you support him now?
    Maybe he got fed up with him breaking the rules he introduced and lying to parliament about it.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,135
    Imagine being Grant Shapps, sent out there to peddle the line "the Prime Minister is not evil, he's just unfathomably stupid, and this is why he has my full confidence".
    https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1514157141950709760
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751
    kle4 said:

    Legally a questionable decision, although as argued in The Tyrannicide Brief, it was still closer to what we'd call an attempt at a fair trial than most got, and definitely fairer than the regicide got.
    One could equally question the legal validity of the Nuremberg trials, as many did at the time.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1946/04/nuremberg-a-fair-trial-a-dangerous-precedent/306492/

    Ultimately all laws must be founded on consent for their legitimacy, as with the position of head of state, and indeed the state itself.
    To argue otherwise is to argue for authoritarianism.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,630

    I'm not a STW fan but your post prompted me to have a look. Reading the piece behind the strapline I see

    "President Zelensky has outlined the two most essential conditions of peace: that the invading Russian troops withdraw from Ukraine and that the Ukraine will become a neutral country, not a member of NATO. These terms are the basis of an agreement, according to Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

    We welcome these developments as the necessary first steps to ending the bloodshed, allowing refugees to return to their homes, and ending the economic damage being done to the livelihoods of ordinary working people both in the combatant states are [sic] around the globe."

    That is not a particularly outrageous view, and certainly not treason. I agree that it doesn't explicitly assign blame and the statement is pretty naively optimistic about the peace talks but citing Zelensky approvingly and calling it a Russian invasion is reasonably clear.

    https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/ukraine-peace-now/
    It may be realpolitik that it can't happen but I believe in democracy. If Ukraine wants to join NATO and NATO accepts, thats democracry. Its not up to Russia. We don't get to intervene in France if they make unpopular choices.

    STW are transparently pro-Russian, not doubt because they still associate them with communism.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,386

    I'm not a STW fan but your post prompted me to have a look. Reading the piece behind the strapline I see

    "President Zelensky has outlined the two most essential conditions of peace: that the invading Russian troops withdraw from Ukraine and that the Ukraine will become a neutral country, not a member of NATO. These terms are the basis of an agreement, according to Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

    We welcome these developments as the necessary first steps to ending the bloodshed, allowing refugees to return to their homes, and ending the economic damage being done to the livelihoods of ordinary working people both in the combatant states are [sic] around the globe."

    That is not a particularly outrageous view, and certainly not treason. I agree that it doesn't explicitly assign blame and the statement is pretty naively optimistic about the peace talks but citing Zelensky approvingly and calling it a Russian invasion is reasonably clear.

    https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/ukraine-peace-now/
    You miss the point I was making: that the first thing it mentions is *our* responsibility. WTF does it mention 'British government to stop talking up war in Ukraine' ?

    I see nothing on that site that says they want anything other than a Russian victory.

    You have been all over the place on Ukraine, Nick. It is not our fault. It is not Ukraine's fault (aside from the fact they commit the ultimate crime of wanting to be a sovereign nation). It is not NATO's fault.

    The war is Russia's fault. If 'Stop the War' really wanted the war to end, they would be pouring their ire onto Russia and calling on them to withdraw.

    They are not.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,135
    Full responsibility: "I did it. I lied about it. I'm sorry. I resign."

    Johnson-style responsibility: "I did it, but nobody told me having beers, on my birthday, surrounded by a group singing 'happy birthday', was a party. It's their fault. They made me lie. So I'm staying."

    https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1514160069952389122
  • Foxy said:

    Good God! An politician being honest about making difficult decisions in the nations interest. It will never catch on here.
    Certainly wont with Starmer
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,135
    .. and future historians will be fascinated that the modern Conservative party was reduced to this: https://twitter.com/proftimbale/status/1514144510045044738
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,529
    Foxy said:

    Good God! An politician being honest about making difficult decisions in the nations interest. It will never catch on here.
    If Macron was being honest he would have said the retirement age would eventually rise to 70.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,771

    "You should have known that he was a nasty piece of work all along. Keep voting Conservative."

    I suppose it's worth a try as a campaign slogan.
    Here we go.
    image
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751

    Oh my God, I thought you were a more intelligent poster. You think Putin would have listened to Mr Thicky? ffs! That is one of the most ridiculous posts I have seen on here
    Prevented our supply of weapons to Ukraine.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,630
    HYUFD said:

    Last time you went Labour, when you voted for Blair in 1997 and 2001, it was 13 years out of power. Not exactly decades
    Arguably it was 18 years (till 2005) for a Tory majority, and that is the best part of two decades.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792
    Nigelb said:

    Prevented our supply of weapons to Ukraine.
    Are you suggesting that would have stopped Putin's ambition, and he wouldn't have invaded, or just led to a much quicker annexation of the whole of Ukraine into "Greater Russia"?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,030
    edited April 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    Full responsibility: "I did it. I lied about it. I'm sorry. I resign."

    Johnson-style responsibility: "I did it, but nobody told me having beers, on my birthday, surrounded by a group singing 'happy birthday', was a party. It's their fault. They made me lie. So I'm staying."

    https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1514160069952389122

    Actually Sky have played a piece with Boris at a school on the same day with the schoolchildren singing happy birthday and giving him a cake

    I expect the result of all this is that we will not have such draconian rules again, irrespective of whether Boris survives or not
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,630

    Let's just shoot down the "Bozo can't resign because don't you know there is a war on?" argument


    1) Asquith gave way to Lloyd George during WW1
    2) Chamberlain gave way to Churchill when there was a war on (that we were a big part of)
    3) Churchill gave way to Atlee when there was war on (that we were a big part of)
    4)Thatcher gave way to Major when there was war on (that we were a big part of)
    5) Blair to Brown, Afghan and Iraq
    6) Brown to Cameron ditto etc.

    These are just off the top of my head. To say that a war, however significant, where none of our troops are even remotely involved is a reason for a law breaking lying buffoon to remain in office is ludicrous

    No point using logic here. Any logical person would have resigned months ago.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792
    mwadams said:

    Here we go.
    image
    I think that sums him up. A nasty piece of work who hides behind an image of "loveable twat". Whichever it is, I don't understand why anyone with half a brain would want him running a whelk stall
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792

    No point using logic here. Any logical person would have resigned months ago.
    Yes, but that argument needs to be put to all Tory MPs that are using this lame excuse to sit on their hands.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,266

    Weirdly she seems to be smiling too. Must have a voucher.
    "Fiona was cross with her partner for voting in this shower of a government, but she decided to get even, not angry, so she filled up her partner's petrol car with diesel while using her partner's credit card to pay for it"
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,535
    ydoethur said:

    Well, TBF they must be feeling a bit sheepish for having wished a criminal PM on us.
    They should be lambasted for doing so.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 51,269

    You miss the point I was making: that the first thing it mentions is *our* responsibility. WTF does it mention 'British government to stop talking up war in Ukraine' ?

    I see nothing on that site that says they want anything other than a Russian victory.

    You have been all over the place on Ukraine, Nick. It is not our fault. It is not Ukraine's fault (aside from the fact they commit the ultimate crime of wanting to be a sovereign nation). It is not NATO's fault.

    The war is Russia's fault. If 'Stop the War' really wanted the war to end, they would be pouring their ire onto Russia and calling on them to withdraw.

    They are not.
    I have been active in the peace movement, but have never liked STW as it is a hard left front, while mine is a more Christian approach to peace.

    Nonetheless calling for Russian withdrawal is clearly not saying "they want a Russian victory".
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,266
    kjh said:

    They should be lambasted for doing so.
    We've been fleeced?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,792

    It may be realpolitik that it can't happen but I believe in democracy. If Ukraine wants to join NATO and NATO accepts, thats democracry. Its not up to Russia. We don't get to intervene in France if they make unpopular choices.

    STW are transparently pro-Russian, not doubt because they still associate them with communism.
    Useful idiots.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,079

    Arguably it was 18 years (till 2005) for a Tory majority, and that is the best part of two decades.
    2015 not 2005 for a Tory majority but we still had a Tory PM from 2010 to 2015.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235
    Re: The Daily Mail's headline

    Corbyn would have chosen a different path on the Russia/Ukraine situation. The idea that we'd change path with the plausible alternatives to Johnson now (Incl Starmer) is ludicrous. It's the most preposterous line of defence for Boris amongst some very bad ones I think.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,079

    If Macron was being honest he would have said the retirement age would eventually rise to 70.
    Then bang goes his chance of getting Melenchon voters to vote for him in the runoff
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2022

    I'm unsure that is of any relevance. Everyone knew the war was going to occur, and STW's website currently does not look much different.
    I think we have copious evidence on PB alone that that was not the case.

    So many savvy takes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,751

    Are you suggesting that would have stopped Putin's ambition, and he wouldn't have invaded, or just led to a much quicker annexation of the whole of Ukraine into "Greater Russia"?
    No. I think you might have a comprehension problem here.
    My comment was in reply to a claim that our policy of helping Ukraine would have been little different under Corbyn.

    It seems to me highly unlikely that Corbyn would readily have supplied weapons in the way we did before Putin started the full scale invasion, and would at the very best have taken the German approach of reluctance change of mind some time after it started.
    It's very probable that Ukraine would as a result have fared far worse than it has.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited April 2022
    “Today’s reading for RPI inflation means that the maximum interest rate, which is charged to current students and graduates earning more than £49,130, will rise from its current level of 4.5% to an eye-watering 12%”

    https://ifs.org.uk/publications/16024

    Although it’s actually a fair bit more complicated than that, if you read the link…
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,205

    or even the use of the word kosher in a general not specifically Jewish situation perhaps?
    Or even @DoubleDutch's choice of username? Tongue in cheek, perhaps?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,386
    Alistair said:

    I think we have copious evidence on PB alone that that was not the case.

    So many savvy takes.
    Okay, anyone who was paying attention. ;)

    The only way the war would not have occurred would have been if the Ukraine had capitulated to Russia before it began.

    And if Russia wins in Ukraine, Putin has made it very clear which countries he sees as being the next to be inserted into his Empire of Shittiness.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    Entertaining stuff on here this morning, and elsewhere, from those trying to find solace for the PM.

    1. It's not Boris's fault - the rules were ridiculously draconian, so let's blame the bastards who came up with them.
    2. Lying doesn't really matter in the big scheme of things, especially when there's a war going on.
    3. And anyway, the lying was about trivial shit and who gives a flying fuck about the Ministerial Code anyway.
    4. When all else fails - it's Corbyn's fault! If Boris goes, Stop the War will take over.

    F'ing brilliant stuff.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,386
    Foxy said:

    I have been active in the peace movement, but have never liked STW as it is a hard left front, while mine is a more Christian approach to peace.

    Nonetheless calling for Russian withdrawal is clearly not saying "they want a Russian victory".
    They're not really calling for a Russian withdrawal though, are they? They just mention Zelenskyy's position, and ignore Lavatory's twisting and turning.

    It's quite simple: they need to say: "Russia is at fault for this war and must withdraw," with no caveats. I'd also like something about stopping the war crimes they are committing.
This discussion has been closed.