MRP poll finds Tories losing 256 seats facing LAB/LD/GRN pact – politicalbetting.com
MRP poll finds Tories losing 256 seats facing LAB/LD/GRN pact – politicalbetting.com
Cambridge mathematician and creator of Electoral Calculus, Martin Baxter, has produced an extraordinary 16k sample that seeks to assess what would happen if LAB, the LDs and the Greens entered into an electoral pact whereby only one of them would field candidates in each seat at a general election. The broad results are in the panel above.
Comments
-
Well that would be disappointing. Not Man U disappointing but close.0
-
BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.0 -
It would be hilarious. At least briefly.DavidL said:Well that would be disappointing. Not Man U disappointing but close.
0 -
For the benefit of the new thread, I think Boris leaked these pics.0
-
"Quite whether such a deal would ever come about I don’t know."
Not a chance.
0 -
A Spartan "If", I think.0
-
If those photos are not the end for Johnson, this country and its democracy are lost.0
-
Wishful thinking, we’ve seen before what happens when people get told what’s good for them.0
-
Just another perfectly legal work gathering according to the Met.CorrectHorseBattery said:BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.3 -
The important question isn't really "how realistic are the chances today (May 23, 2022) of such a pact?
It's "how likely is the publicity round this poll to force die-hard local activists to stop posturing, and accept that some version of such a pact WILL ensure the Tories get chucked out?"
In my (allegedly safe Tory) constituency, there's no doubt a clear majority of voters would support one ABC (anything But Conservative) candidate. But there's still no sign of any sanity hitting a hard core of deranged activists in all three ABC parties - who behave as if Johnson was actually paying them to secure his future1 -
"Quite whether such a deal would ever come about I don’t know."
I think you do Mr Smithson!
2 -
What's in it for the LDs? SKS or his replacement could tell them to away and ... whereas in the current situation they have some hope of influence in a hung parliament.1
-
Is Dom's clearing-house for anti-Boris content back in action now that the police investigation has finished, and he doesn't have to worry so much about legal issues ? I think this might well be, somehow.
If so, we could be in for a more entertaining and more democratic time again, much like December and January.0 -
He was asked by Labour MP Catherine West on December 8: "Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on the 13th of November?"
Speaking under privilege in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson replied: "No. But I’m sure that, whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bombshell-photos-show-boris-27044271
Dunno why itv think they have to obfuscate other attenders0 -
Not sure it is quite that bad to be honest.SouthamObserver said:If those photos are not the end for Johnson, this country and its democracy are lost.
0 -
Is this the one which Carrie says was actually a strategy session?rottenborough said:
Just another perfectly legal work gathering according to the Met.CorrectHorseBattery said:BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.
Why is Carrie in a strategy session?0 -
SouthamObserver said:
If those photos are not the end for Johnson, this country and its democracy are lost.
If people don’t think lying to parliament matters. Or it does, but not as much as Ukraine, etc, fine. But when Boris said there were no parties, all rules were followed, and he was angry to learn about cheese and wine events, that was a bare-faced lie. So why pretend it wasn’t.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/15287634196246036540 -
So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.
0 -
Boris Johnson must resign, he has lied to the HoC.4
-
When a PM can break laws he creates and is able to lie to Parliament with impunity, democracy is gone.rottenborough said:
Not sure it is quite that bad to be honest.SouthamObserver said:If those photos are not the end for Johnson, this country and its democracy are lost.
3 -
Is it a lie? he was asked to tell the house whether there was a party on 13 November. He said no.rottenborough said:So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.
Does that mean
There was no party....or...
He could not tell us whether there was a party or not.
0 -
You can also add the Met to that very long list of people and institutions that Boris Johnson has come into contact with and totally destroyed.4
-
I couldn't agree more. But it wont happen.CorrectHorseBattery said:Boris Johnson must resign, he has lied to the HoC.
2 -
At a guess, because that was the deal they made to get the photos in the first place.IshmaelZ said:He was asked by Labour MP Catherine West on December 8: "Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on the 13th of November?"
Speaking under privilege in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson replied: "No. But I’m sure that, whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bombshell-photos-show-boris-27044271
Dunno why itv think they have to obfuscate other attenders2 -
It is all down to his mpsrottenborough said:
I couldn't agree more. But it wont happen.CorrectHorseBattery said:Boris Johnson must resign, he has lied to the HoC.
0 -
FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London0 -
Legal PB types - is it possible for someone to challenge the Met's decision that these events of which we now see photographic evidence were "necessary for work"?
0 -
As, I say, it wont happen.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is all down to his mpsrottenborough said:
I couldn't agree more. But it wont happen.CorrectHorseBattery said:Boris Johnson must resign, he has lied to the HoC.
Tory MPs have decided they want him to be their leader for GE 2024, mainly, I think, because they can't see an alternative.0 -
Good pointDecrepiterJohnL said:
At a guess, because that was the deal they made to get the photos in the first place.IshmaelZ said:He was asked by Labour MP Catherine West on December 8: "Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on the 13th of November?"
Speaking under privilege in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson replied: "No. But I’m sure that, whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bombshell-photos-show-boris-27044271
Dunno why itv think they have to obfuscate other attenders
1 -
FPT
I would just use a Contactless bank card to do Abbey Wood to Paddington!Applicant said:.
London Terminals has always meant "only London Terminals you can reach directly" - based on Thameslink I would expect Abbey Wood to Liverpool Street would be fine on a London Terminals ticket but Paddington wouldn't. Unless NR have changed their rules to exclude this - however from some reading I've done it seems more likely that TFL's media people don't understand London Terminals tickets.RochdalePioneers said:
Have been reading about the typical British stupidity with regards to ticketing. Its a National Rail service which means their Conditions of Travel apply. In parallel pricing in the core is the same as tube fares. But despite the NRCoT rules being clear and absolute I am already reading that confusion means that people trying to do break of journey will be stopped, that x to London Terminals tickets won't be valid from say Greenhithe to Liverpool Street despite LST being a London Terminal etc etc etc.Sunil_Prasannan said:As many of you have probably guessed, the Elizabeth Line has been rushed into opening in time for the Platinum Jubilee without it all functioning as one cohesive service.
So, from tomorrow, the central section east of Paddington (low level) including the branch from Whitechapel to Canary Wharf, Custom House, Woolwich and Abbey Wood, will not yet be connected to Stratford in the east, and Acton in the west. Bond Street platforms are also not ready. But the connections and Bond Street should be ready "by the autumn". Hmmm,,, we'll see!
Also, if you're into trying to take pics of trains arriving/leaving at the stations from Paddington to Canary Wharf, as well as Woolwich - don't bother! Platform edge doors similar to those on the Jubilee line will prevent you having a clear view of the trains or the tracks!
Best places to see the trains on the section that's opening tomorrow are Custom House and Abbey Wood, which are out in the open. Also, there's a footbridge at Silvertown, near LCY Airport, affording views of the route.
Journey time is 29 minutes from Paddington to Abbey Wood. And the frequency is every 5 minutes. Not bad at all for a "main line" service.
Personally, travelling in from Ilford, I aim to change trains at Liverpool Street, head southeast to Abbey Wood, then visit each station on the way back to Liverpool Street, head west through to Paddington (low level), then visit the remaining two stations in Zone 1 (Tottenham Court Road and Farringdon) on the way back to Liverpool Street, thereby doing the route and all nine stations opening tomorrow.
Also, it's bound to be full of media-people and fucking Youtubers tomorrow, so I'm seriously mulling delaying my expedition until Wednesday when it's bound to be less busy. But then, that's just me!
Supposedly Great British Railways was supposed to do a big fares bonfire to fix all this. Instead its on an indefinite delay with only a long list of Tory MPs trying to secure its HQ to their constituency to show it even exists.
0 -
That is what he relies on. The more obvious it was a party (or at least not work), however, the more that explanation relies on admitting to being incredibly stupid. And therefore not fit to be PM.MISTY said:
Is it a lie? he was asked to tell the house whether there was a party on 13 November. He said no.rottenborough said:So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.
Does that mean
There was no party....or...
He could not tell us whether there was a party or not.
It means nothing, not enough people care and it isn't exciting enough an image to set pulses racing again, but it is worth emphasising every time just how dumb he is claiming to be in order to deny that he lied to the House.1 -
Arf!
He won’t go though.2 -
"I always lie. In fact, I am lying to you now!"rottenborough said:So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.0 -
...
3 -
Makes it easier for someone to determine who took the photo if everyone in a small gathering in the photo is identified I suspect.IshmaelZ said:
Good pointDecrepiterJohnL said:
At a guess, because that was the deal they made to get the photos in the first place.IshmaelZ said:He was asked by Labour MP Catherine West on December 8: "Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on the 13th of November?"
Speaking under privilege in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson replied: "No. But I’m sure that, whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bombshell-photos-show-boris-27044271
Dunno why itv think they have to obfuscate other attenders0 -
This week I will mainly be looking forward to Twitter's reaction when the publication of Sue Gray's report gets postponed so that the Met can reconsider its investigation.
https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/15287612001289748501 -
A while back it was noted how Zelensky was promoting some direct fundraising initiative, which interestingly allowed people to designate what they wanted their donation to go to, including weaponry.
Interestingly it would appear the first batch of donations were overwhelmingly for 'defence and demining', to the exent nothing much could be done with anything else, like infrastructure.
https://u24.gov.ua/1 -
No doubt same question was asked re: Madame de Pompadour and Lola Montez?Gardenwalker said:
Is this the one which Carrie says was actually a strategy session?rottenborough said:
Just another perfectly legal work gathering according to the Met.CorrectHorseBattery said:BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.
Why is Carrie in a strategy session?0 -
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London0 -
Exactly.rottenborough said:"Quite whether such a deal would ever come about I don’t know."
Not a chance.
While I'm sure that there may be some informal local alliances, there simply won't be any formal agreement, because any formal agreement literally destroys the smaller party.1 -
Two principal political problems now for Boris Johnson
1) political effects of the pictures: the political damage of partygate is already substantial but a series of pictures could reignite it all it again and yield yet more with the public.
2) Parliament: the biggest immediate danger to Johnson is the charge he has misled Parliament which pictures/Sue Gray could add more credence to. Things looked stable last week. Don’t believe it. This could still quickly deteriorate.
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/15287669273462251520 -
On this one I'm prepared to accept it was rotten long before he got his greasy mits anywhere near it, so its not causation at least.SouthamObserver said:You can also add the Met to that very long list of people and institutions that Boris Johnson has come into contact with and totally destroyed.
1 -
To be honest the whitewash they have produced seems far more serious for the future of this country than Johnson's lying.SouthamObserver said:You can also add the Met to that very long list of people and institutions that Boris Johnson has come into contact with and totally destroyed.
At least it is obvious to every man and his dog that Johnson was lying his tits off. Exactly how the Met came to decide that every piss-up he was involved with as we will see from Sue Grey was strictly necessary for work except ten min thing with a cake is completely obscured.0 -
Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party0
-
It is an interesting example I suppose of Western cities aping modern cities elsewhere, in China and middle east for example, in going high rise in a short span of time. They could have copied New York ages ago but didn't.Gardenwalker said:
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London0 -
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
0 -
The Met was destroyed long before Boris Johnson.SouthamObserver said:You can also add the Met to that very long list of people and institutions that Boris Johnson has come into contact with and totally destroyed.
5 -
Its only a lie if he thought that was a party. If he didn't think it was a party and thought it was work, then it wasn't a lie.rottenborough said:So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.
Just as if Keir says all rules were followed and drinking alcohol with others was work for him, he's not lying if he means it.
You need to be consistent. Anyone who says that one is a party and the other isn't is just a partisan shill and not being consistent.1 -
Because the Met are incompetent.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
Replace them with the Met Office, we might see a general improvement.0 -
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust Dom to choose wallpaper without input from Carrie.Gardenwalker said:
Is this the one which Carrie says was actually a strategy session?rottenborough said:
Just another perfectly legal work gathering according to the Met.CorrectHorseBattery said:BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.
Why is Carrie in a strategy session?1 -
I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)2 -
From memory, Dom had a purpose-built extension to his house in De Beauvoir for his tapestry collection. So perhaps he knows more about wallpaper than you think!rcs1000 said:
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust Dom to choose wallpaper without input from Carrie.Gardenwalker said:
Is this the one which Carrie says was actually a strategy session?rottenborough said:
Just another perfectly legal work gathering according to the Met.CorrectHorseBattery said:BREAKING Bombshell photos show Boris Johnson raising glass at No10 party he denied happened
https://twitter.com/MirrorBreaking_/status/1528759605232295937
I would like to thank Boris Johnson for his hard work.
Why is Carrie in a strategy session?0 -
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.Gardenwalker said:
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.0 -
Notable how Guido for one reports on the photo. Whilst still making a crack at Labour and Keir's expense, the scepticism of Boris's original claim is pretty clear.
The leaked snaps show the PM giving a toast to Lee Cain at his leaving do on November 13, behind a table-full of wine, gin and fizz. The photo itself is hardly a Great Gatsby-level party, however it’s the straight-up denial of any party on that date given in the Commons six months ago that may prove tricky to navigate...He will no doubt try to argue leaving drinks are not a party. What the Standards Committee will make of that argument remains to be seen…0 -
Did they assign Inspector Lestrade? Or was Deputy Barnie Fife seconded to the Met from Mayberry PD?Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
0 -
Its very simple. An explicit lie. And he went on: “I apologise for the impression that has been given that staff in Downing Street take this less than seriously. I am sickened myself and furious about that, but I repeat what I have said to him: I have been repeatedly assured that the rules were not broken. I repeat that I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken.”IshmaelZ said:He was asked by Labour MP Catherine West on December 8: "Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether there was a party in Downing Street on the 13th of November?"
Speaking under privilege in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson replied: "No. But I’m sure that, whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-bombshell-photos-show-boris-27044271
Dunno why itv think they have to obfuscate other attenders
Lie after lie. He knows there was at least one party. He was there. And we now have the proof.1 -
There may have been a party. I don't remember. I was too pissed.MISTY said:
Is it a lie? he was asked to tell the house whether there was a party on 13 November. He said no.rottenborough said:So Johnson told the Commons 8th Dec 2021 that there was no party on 13th November 2020.
That was a lie as the photograph now shows.
Does that mean
There was no party....or...
He could not tell us whether there was a party or not.2 -
You're being an inconsistent hypocrite.RochdalePioneers said:I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
Campaigning events were legal in April 2021.
Working in person if required (like in Downing Street) was equally legal in November 2020.
If being there for work (campaigning) makes alcohol (Starmer) legal then how is that any different to being there for work (Downing Street) makes alcohol (Johnson) legal?
You keep trying to claim Keir's beer is campaigning, but the Downing Street stuff is a party. What is the distinction though, other than the fact you don't like Boris?
If Boris didn't think that was a party and thought it was work, as Keir thought [and you still think] Keir drinking was work, then how is it a lie? How are you objectively drawing a distinction between Keir and Boris when both people are simply photographed drinking with people they were legally allowed to work with, but while socialisation was illegal for both.0 -
I can't because I don't know all the facts.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
One possibility is this: the PM was at his work place.He had a reasonable excuse therefore for being away from home. Part what was happening at work was saying goodbye to a colleague. It is reasonable to consider this part of his work duties. That is what he was doing. The fact that there was drink does not change that. The rules made no mention of alcohol.
I make no comment about how good a legal / factual analysis this is as I don't have all the facts. But I can see how this might be argued.
It would help if the Met set out the legal / factual analysis they have used when coming to their decisions on FPNs.
6 -
Voting intention has stabilised now with Redfield Wilton showing no change: Lab 39% Con 33% LD 12%.
Although Starmer is now only 2% ahead of Johnson as best PM with Johnson leading on the two COVID categories vs Starmer.0 -
What we know is:RochdalePioneers said:I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)- Boris has not been fined for attending any party
- Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
0 - Boris has not been fined for attending any party
-
Don't see why the decision not to issue fpn can't be challenged.rottenborough said:Legal PB types - is it possible for someone to challenge the Met's decision that these events of which we now see photographic evidence were "necessary for work"?
0 -
To give cover to Durham to not fine Starmer.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
1 -
Depends what you mean by end. If he survives his own MP's he surely won't be raising a glass when the GE exit poll comes in.SouthamObserver said:If those photos are not the end for Johnson, this country and its democracy are lost.
0 -
The Met are corrupt. Seems self-evident. Again.rottenborough said:
To be honest the whitewash they have produced seems far more serious for the future of this country than Johnson's lying.SouthamObserver said:You can also add the Met to that very long list of people and institutions that Boris Johnson has come into contact with and totally destroyed.
At least it is obvious to every man and his dog that Johnson was lying his tits off. Exactly how the Met came to decide that every piss-up he was involved with as we will see from Sue Grey was strictly necessary for work except ten min thing with a cake is completely obscured.1 -
See this fpt - "Worse for the Met. Didn't they realise that photos would come out and people will be asking how it is that these incidents are not breaches of the rules?rottenborough said:Legal PB types - is it possible for someone to challenge the Met's decision that these events of which we now see photographic evidence were "necessary for work"?
The PM will say that the Met has investigated and their decision should be respected. The Met meanwhile will say ..... well what?
Meanwhile I fully expect someone like that Jolyon character to try and judicially review the Met's decision not to fine.
So on it goes."
and my answer upthread.1 -
As Sky has just said these photos are the starting pistol for the Sue Gray report, and I expect it will be a torrid week for Boris but then on Thursday Parliament closes for the platinum celebrations providing time for conservative mps to make up their minds and understand that they are risking their careers if they sit on their hands0
-
I suspect that may be the stitch-up. No more fines for the PM. No fine for SKS.tlg86 said:
To give cover to Durham to not fine Starmer.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
Both sides happy with their incumbent opponent.0 -
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?Applicant said:
What we know is:RochdalePioneers said:I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)- Boris has not been fined for attending any party
- Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
0 - Boris has not been fined for attending any party
-
London is low rise compared to most US or Canadian cities, or Tokyo, or Beijing, or Hong Kong.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London
It is high rise relative to European peers.0 -
Sadly no, no-one can. There is no adequate explanation.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
0 -
Exactly. No FPN = officially legal.IshmaelZ said:
Utterly wrong, where on earth are you getting "officially legal for him" from? From plod's decision not to FPN?Applicant said:
What we know is:RochdalePioneers said:I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)- Boris has not been fined for attending any party
- Anything that Boris attended that was a party was officially legal for him
0 - Boris has not been fined for attending any party
-
O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.2 -
Amusing to see the BoJo Brigade falling over themselves yet again attempting to defend the indefensible.
Keep it up! You ARE helping . . . just not the way you hope . . .
Sorta like 45's helpful suggestions to Dr. Oz just now.0 -
Thanks. So it is possible to do a judicial review of a police FPN decision?Cyclefree said:
See this fpt - "Worse for the Met. Didn't they realise that photos would come out and people will be asking how it is that these incidents are not breaches of the rules?rottenborough said:Legal PB types - is it possible for someone to challenge the Met's decision that these events of which we now see photographic evidence were "necessary for work"?
The PM will say that the Met has investigated and their decision should be respected. The Met meanwhile will say ..... well what?
Meanwhile I fully expect someone like that Jolyon character to try and judicially review the Met's decision not to fine.
So on it goes."
and my answer upthread.0 -
Its another typical straw man absolutist load of guff. Nobody has set "alcohol" as the legal threshold. As you well know.BartholomewRoberts said:
You're being an inconsistent hypocrite.RochdalePioneers said:I see that BR is still trying to say "whats the difference between this and Starmer". Without wasting everyone's time as he will keep repeating the same guff and ignore everyone else, remember that the Starmer case is that campaigning events were legal in April 21. There was no similar legal allowance for leaving parties etc in November 20.
Putting things very bluntly, what will absolutely fuck him is the string of lies to Parliament. Not only did Allegra Stratton describe this kind of thing and get angrily fired for doing so, Bonzo told everyone he too was very upset.
As he told the Commons: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that no Covid rules were broken”. Now a provable lie as here he is at the very same party. No "its only a cake" excuses here. He was there. At a party. Then said "I have been told there was no party".
Liar. Resign. (he won't, but now we have to watch "I'll say anything for money" Tory MPs soil themselves on TV trying to claim otherwise)
Campaigning events were legal in April 2021.
Working in person if required (like in Downing Street) was equally legal in November 2020.
If being there for work (campaigning) makes alcohol (Starmer) legal then how is that any different to being there for work (Downing Street) makes alcohol (Johnson) legal?
You keep trying to claim Keir's beer is campaigning, but the Downing Street stuff is a party. What is the distinction though, other than the fact you don't like Boris?
If Boris didn't think that was a party and thought it was work, as Keir thought [and you still think] Keir drinking was work, then how is it a lie? How are you objectively drawing a distinction between Keir and Boris when both people are simply photographed drinking with people they were legally allowed to work with, but while socialisation was illegal for both.1 -
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?BartholomewRoberts said:
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.Gardenwalker said:
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)0 -
Keir Starmer with alcohol - obviously legal, campaigning was legal, why are you even talking about this?RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris Johnson with alcohol - outrageous, obviously a party, how dare that lying liar lie to Parliament2 -
Let's see if Labour go after the Met.dixiedean said:
I suspect that may be the stitch-up. No more fines for the PM. No fine for SKS.tlg86 said:
To give cover to Durham to not fine Starmer.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
Both sides happy with their incumbent opponent.0 -
Difference is SKS was having dinner - arguably necessary when campaigning. But what Mr J has in front of him ...BartholomewRoberts said:
Keir Starmer with alcohol - obviously legal, campaigning was legal, why are you even talking about this?RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris Johnson with alcohol - outrageous, obviously a party, how dare that lying liar lie to Parliament1 -
They are risking their careers whatever they do. Any new leader will be untried electorally, a huge gamble.Big_G_NorthWales said:As Sky has just said these photos are the starting pistol for the Sue Gray report, and I expect it will be a torrid week for Boris but then on Thursday Parliament closes for the platinum celebrations providing time for conservative mps to make up their minds and understand that they are risking their careers if they sit on their hands
0 -
Frankly, unless there are photos of Boris Johnson snorting cocaine off the breasts of a naked hooker, then I'm not ready to call this a party yet.6
-
So we have an interesting juxtaposition. On one hand the Met have decided to fine everyone who was at this party but not the PM (who was "present but not involved"). On the other hand we have photographs showing him illegally partying.
I assume we can now expect a week of Hate Mail front pages demanding the police investigate this clear lack of justice.
So what do we expect from the Wail on tomorrow's front page to deflect away from this? KEIR'S TRANS WOKE THREAT TO YOUR WIFE AND DAUGHTER?1 -
Well the country has gone to the dogs allowing this chancer near no 10 etc but........that photo is very very funny. It looks like a pish up at a student squat. Out of shot an two week old pile of washing up and some mouldy cheese whilst someone pours a bottle of vodka, a bottle of 20 20 and some pineapple juice into a mixing bowl.0
-
Your last line must be PB understatement of the year!!!!Cyclefree said:
I can't because I don't know all the facts.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
One possibility is this: the PM was at his work place.He had a reasonable excuse therefore for being away from home. Part what was happening at work was saying goodbye to a colleague. It is reasonable to consider this part of his work duties. That is what he was doing. The fact that there was drink does not change that. The rules made no mention of alcohol.
I make no comment about how good a legal / factual analysis this is as I don't have all the facts. But I can see how this might be argued.
It would help if the Met set out the legal / factual analysis they have used when coming to their decisions on FPNs.3 -
That's tomorrow's leakrcs1000 said:Frankly, unless there are photos of Boris Johnson snorting cocaine off the breasts of a naked hooker, then I'm not ready to call this a party yet.
1 -
That flows logically from your assumptions, but given that your assumption is that Boris is a lying liar then you're perilously close to circular logic.RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.1 -
Precisely my point. Long Island has the space so people have spread out to live there, as they'd rather use the space than go up into the sky as GW proposes.rcs1000 said:
Is it because Long Island is 1,401 square miles in size while Manhattan is 22 square miles?BartholomewRoberts said:
Almost every residential area in the world is generally low rise. For very good reason, people prefer low rise by and large.Gardenwalker said:
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London
For the small minority who want high rise, good luck to them, they should be able to get it. For everyone else, they should be able to get what they want too.
Most New Yorkers live in Long Island not Manhattan for a reason.
(It is also worth remembering that 1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day.)
Approximately as many people commute into Manhattan every day as the entire population of Manhattan (including children and pensioners) who live there. So it seems reasonable to believe that even most workers in Manhattan have chosen not to live there.0 -
Laughable. You are the only person in the country who has decided that the presence of alcohol is the legal bar. Not even Dan Hodges has posted that argument, and he's invented some new space logic to justify some of his tweets.BartholomewRoberts said:
Keir Starmer with alcohol - obviously legal, campaigning was legal, why are you even talking about this?RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris Johnson with alcohol - outrageous, obviously a party, how dare that lying liar lie to Parliament1 -
Reminder: Boris Johnson told parliament "the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times [in No 10 re covid regulations]".
There can be no doubt now that he lied. The House of Commons' Privileges Committee should deal with that urgently.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1528771626518683649
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/15287540034163875890 -
For the second time in as many threads, no we do not and your comment is arguably actionable.RochdalePioneers said:So we have an interesting juxtaposition. On one hand the Met have decided to fine everyone who was at this party but not the PM (who was "present but not involved"). On the other hand we have photographs showing him illegally partying.
I assume we can now expect a week of Hate Mail front pages demanding the police investigate this clear lack of justice.
So what do we expect from the Wail on tomorrow's front page to deflect away from this? KEIR'S TRANS WOKE THREAT TO YOUR WIFE AND DAUGHTER?
Boris got no FPN for the event pictured therefore it does not show him doing anything illegal.0 -
RochdalePioneers said:
Laughable. You are the only person in the country who has decided that the presence of alcohol is the legal bar. Not even Dan Hodges has posted that argument, and he's invented some new space logic to justify some of his tweets.
the photo of Boris Johnson with several colleagues and empty wine bottles during lockdown raises serious questions for Keir Starmer...
https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/15287716964251525121 -
Just seen Patel open the public order debate, as usual she spends her time talking about opposition members writing to her about criminals who shouldn't be deported. Refuses to give way to shadow HS but takes Burgon, secure in the knowledge he'll make a fool of himself. Doesn't disappoint and then Gullis gets up to say protesters are stopping cooking oil getting through. We're so lucky with the high standard of debate and those in office.0
-
Forecast: Big Dogger cares Rockall after Sole FPN despite Malin(tentions)kle4 said:
Because the Met are incompetent.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
Replace them with the Met Office, we might see a general improvement.0 -
You're not considering whether it is an axiom of modern UK politics. Like the straight lines in Euclidean geometry. You can't do trigonometry without the basic fact that a line is straight. And so on.Applicant said:
That flows logically from your assumptions, but given that your assumption is that Boris is a lying liar then you're perilously close to circular logic.RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.0 -
It looks to me like there's food there.Carnyx said:
Difference is SKS was having dinner - arguably necessary when campaigning. But what Mr J has in front of him ...BartholomewRoberts said:
Keir Starmer with alcohol - obviously legal, campaigning was legal, why are you even talking about this?RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris Johnson with alcohol - outrageous, obviously a party, how dare that lying liar lie to Parliament
If food and alcohol is legal sustenance then what type of food and alcohol you consume is just personal preference.0 -
I prefer Wiki.Gardenwalker said:
London has quite a few tall buildings but is generally low rise. I urge you to go overseas to see it yourself, or do some googling if you prefer.Sunil_Prasannan said:FPT
"The Greater London metropolitan area contains the second most skyscrapers of a city in Europe. There are 33 skyscrapers in Greater London that reach a roof height of at least 150 metres (492 ft),[1] with 57 in Moscow, 21 in the Paris Metropolitan Area, 17 in Frankfurt, 16 in Warsaw, 6 in Madrid, 5 each in Milan and Rotterdam, and 4 in Manchester."Gardenwalker said:
I merely note that
4. London is low-rise compared to international norms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_and_structures_in_London
Anyway, London's high rise for Europe, with only Moscow having more towers higher than 150 metres.0 -
There is another logical interpretation. Was he actually sent a questionnaire?Applicant said:
For the second time in as many threads, no we do not and your comment is arguably actionable.RochdalePioneers said:So we have an interesting juxtaposition. On one hand the Met have decided to fine everyone who was at this party but not the PM (who was "present but not involved"). On the other hand we have photographs showing him illegally partying.
I assume we can now expect a week of Hate Mail front pages demanding the police investigate this clear lack of justice.
So what do we expect from the Wail on tomorrow's front page to deflect away from this? KEIR'S TRANS WOKE THREAT TO YOUR WIFE AND DAUGHTER?
Boris got no FPN for the event pictured therefore it does not show him doing anything illegal.0 -
Starmer has never denied the gathering took place and has never lied to Parliament about it. Now do Boris Johnson.BartholomewRoberts said:
Keir Starmer with alcohol - obviously legal, campaigning was legal, why are you even talking about this?RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris Johnson with alcohol - outrageous, obviously a party, how dare that lying liar lie to Parliament
3 -
It is not my assumption that Boris is a liar.Applicant said:
That flows logically from your assumptions, but given that your assumption is that Boris is a lying liar then you're perilously close to circular logic.RochdalePioneers said:O
One of the supposed reasons given was that they used photographic evidence as an evidence bar. Which appears as robust as a Simon Clarke explanation now.Applicant said:
Because they investigated it and found he hadn't broken the rules.CorrectHorseBattery said:Can somebody explain, why the Met has not issued him with another fine for that party
They didn't investigate it. They covered it up. Fine a load of junior staff. Protect the PM and the senior Civil Servants. The establishment looks after its own.
Boris IS a liar. Its a fact. When you have been fired twice and the reason given both times is that you are a liar, and when you have been divorced twice for adultery (lying to your wife) and have a string of both affairs and illegitimate children littered behind you, its no longer an assumption.4
