Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on March 13, 2019, 12:59:56 PM
-
The time must be right for contemplating Britain's next leader. Indeed it must be time for a new approach to this although we should perhaps watch out if John Bercow is seen looking for Conch shells on the beach at Brighton.
For Boris Johnson the matter is simple....entitlement and brexiteering plus a sharp suit, well carried and a haircut to match with the emphasis on appearance. ( or else why would Johnson have gone to the trouble?)
If this then is the new criteria then we should have Nigel Farage as PM. Chiefly since you just know that were Johnson to become PM he would revert to the cockamamy hair and looking every inch like a sack of shit tied up in the middle.
-
On the subject of Johnson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-child-abuse-investigation-comments-police-knife-crime-a8820631.html
-
On the subject of Johnson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-child-abuse-investigation-comments-police-knife-crime-a8820631.html
Rich coming from a Cockwomble who really has spaffed millions up walls.
Hopefully this'll be the last we'll hear from him.
-
Rich coming from a Cockwomble who really has spaffed millions up walls.
Hopefully this'll be the last we'll hear from him.
What does spaffed mean?
-
What does spaffed mean?
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spaffed
-
On the subject of Johnson
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-child-abuse-investigation-comments-police-knife-crime-a8820631.html
Yes he’s a traitorous .... person. But did you see the photo taken at a German carnival?
-
Yes he’s a traitorous .... person. But did you see the photo taken at a German carnival?
Sorry don't get what your post is trying to say.
-
Sorry don't get what your post is trying to say.
Embedded in the article about Johnson being a twat is a photo taken at a German carnival of an effigy of May with her pointy nose skewering a man in a bowler hat labeled “British economy”
-
Embedded in the article about Johnson being a twat is a photo taken at a German carnival of an effigy of May with her pointy nose skewering a man in a bowler hat labeled “British economy”
And the relevance to calling Johnson treasonou s in regard to the story.
-
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spaffed
Thanks. Never heard it before.
-
Boris has made a complete idiot of himself as usual! I too noticed his hair has been cut properly for once!
As for the next PM, David Milliband would have made a very good one, imo.
-
And the relevance to calling Johnson treasonou s in regard to the story.
I didn’t call Johnson treasonous in regard to the story. I just called him traitorous as a general description.
-
Boris has made a complete idiot of himself as usual! I too noticed his hair has been cut properly for once!
As for the next PM, David Milliband would have made a very good one, imo.
So would Josiah Bartlett, but I think we should limit the discussion to realistic candidates.
-
I give you... (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Caroline_Lucas_2010.jpg)
-
I give you... (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Caroline_Lucas_2010.jpg)
i thought we were agreed on realistic options.
-
i thought we were agreed on realistic options.
"Be realistic - demand the impossible." Lefty slogan from the early 70s.
-
"Be realistic - demand the impossible." Lefty slogan from the early 70s.
Which is, of course, completely nonsensical and might explain why the left has a hard time getting into power.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48385696
It looks as if TM's departure date will soon be revealed. If the likes of Boris, Gove, Leadsom or Rees-Mogg take over as PM, I reckon it will be a case of, 'come back May all is forgiven'.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48385696
It looks as if TM's departure date will soon be revealed. If the likes of Boris, Gove, Leadsom or Rees-Mogg take over as PM, I reckon it will be a case of, 'come back May all is forgiven'.
'We're all fucked. I'm fucked. You're fucked. The whole department's fucked. It's been the biggest cock-up ever and we're all completely fucked.'
-
'We're all fucked. I'm fucked. You're fucked. The whole department's fucked. It's been the biggest cock-up ever and we're all completely fucked.'
and still the world turns hahaha
-
https://dorseteye.com/boris-johnson-favourite-for-leadership-in-a-typically-strong-tory-field/?fbclid=IwAR1XHi39apBujmUv5PiFyIxZI1ZQrwsmaSaK8SvltF9vErIVdzJy9MwvH2A
-
May's gone at the beginning of June (well the 7th) - but only as Tory leader - she remains PM until the tory leadership contest is concluded.
-
Which is quite bizarre. It basically means that we don't really have a PM, just a facsimile of one from the time she resigns. Though I suppose that's been true for a while.
-
Which is quite bizarre. It basically means that we don't really have a PM, just a facsimile of one from the time she resigns. Though I suppose that's been true for a while.
I think it is the common approach - so Cameron remained PM until May was identified as successor, likewise Blair and Brown (albeit in both those cases the process to find a successor was truncated). Same with Thatcher and Major, although the leadership process was already under way when she announced she would resign - in fact she remained PM until Major was confirmed as the new Tory leader.
The only alternative would be to promote the deputy PM (David Lidington) to be interim PM - however that wouldn't provide any greater authority to act in the role than May until a new leader is found.
So on the assumption the leadership contest goes the whole way - i.e. to a vote of the membership - we will effectively be in a holding pattern for several months in terms of progress on brexit.
-
Yeah, I get that it is the common approach but it doesn't stop it being quite bizarre when you think about it. And given the situation we are in makes it even worse.
-
Yeah, I get that it is the common approach but it doesn't stop it being quite bizarre when you think about it. And given the situation we are in makes it even worse.
I can't see what the alternative would be - you need to have a PM as there are things that require a PM all the time (not least the visit of Trump in a couple of weeks time).
However whichever way this could be sorted (continue as PM until successor is found, or drop in deputy as interim) the nominal PM will have no authority to act in any meaningful political manner until the new leader is found.
I think the question now is whether the Tory parliamentary party hold their nerve and put forward tow candidates to their membership, or blink and settle on a single successor (as per May and Brown) without reference to the membership. If the latter then a new PM could be in place by mid June - if the former it might not be completed until September, allowing time for hustings, debates and voting by the membership.
-
Why can't an outgoing PM remain as party leader while any search for their successor takes place?
-
Why can't an outgoing PM remain as party leader while any search for their successor takes place?
I guess they could, but I don't think the issue is who is Tory party leader (that's up to them) but who is PM.
-
But in not being the leader of the party, their authority as PM , if they have any, is undermined.
-
But in not being the leader of the party, their authority as PM , if they have any, is undermined.
I think the key words there are if they have any
-
But in not being the leader of the party, their authority as PM , if they have any, is undermined.
It is not unheard of. Neville Chamberlain remained leader of the Conservative Party until his death in November 1940. Winston Churchill had become Prime Minister in May.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/24/theresa-may-tory-downing-street-leadership-contest
-
From the New Statesman :
Clearly the chief cheerleader from the Boris Johnson Fan Club.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/05/repellent-chaotic-and-serial-liar-boris-johnson-would-be-catastrophic-prime
-
There's a new film, provisionally called 'A Clout', in pre-production, but they won't be choosing the cast until July.
-
Gove has joined the other motley crew to become PM. He wrecked the education system, as PM he would make the country into an even worse mess than it is at present, with the threat of Brexit hanging over it.
-
Gove has joined the other motley crew to become PM. He wrecked the education system, as PM he would make the country into an even worse mess than it is at present, with the threat of Brexit hanging over it.
Are there any candidates who wouldn't make the country even worse?
May has gone, but she is likely to be replaced with something much worse.
-
Are there any candidates who wouldn't make the country even worse?
May has gone, but she is likely to be replaced with something much worse.
Agreed.
-
Are there any candidates who wouldn't make the country even worse?
May has gone, but she is likely to be replaced with something much worse.
Rory Stewart. Very intelligent, and a lot tougher than he looks. His CV is extraordinary (if true). I don't know if the Tory politicians (or the country's Tories in general) would consider him "their sort of chap", though.
-
Hi Dicky,
Rory Stewart. Very intelligent, and a lot tougher than he looks. His CV is extraordinary (if true). I don't know if the Tory politicians (or the country's Tories in general) would consider him "their sort of chap", though.
By co-incidence I just came here to post something about Rory Stewart. From a field of extremists, half-wits and serial liars he seems to that rare thing - an intelligent, honest and nuanced tory. I have to say that though I'd never vote tory I do like the cut of his jib. (My son was telling yesterday that Brad Pitt's production company has bought the rights to his story by the way!).
What do people think? He seems to me to be by a mile the best of an exceptional ill-equipped bunch.
-
Stewart is Ok but stands no chance - even if voted leader, he wouldn't be any better than May at selling the Withdrawal Deal.
The rest are terrible. I suppose if Johnson got in there is just a possibility of revoking A50 - after all I doubt he really cares as long as he is on top.
-
Hi Dicky,
By co-incidence I just came here to post something about Rory Stewart. From a field of extremists, half-wits and serial liars he seems to that rare thing - an intelligent, honest and nuanced tory. I have to say that though I'd never vote tory I do like the cut of his jib. (My son was telling yesterday that Brad Pitt's production company has bought the rights to his story by the way!).
What do people think? He seems to me to be by a mile the best of an exceptional ill-equipped bunch.
he seems like a nice chap but how long will it be before some wag likens his appearance to Wallace from Wallace and Gromit when he speaks .
A superficial problem to overcome? ;)
-
Hi Dicky,
By co-incidence I just came here to post something about Rory Stewart. From a field of extremists, half-wits and serial liars he seems to that rare thing - an intelligent, honest and nuanced tory. I have to say that though I'd never vote tory I do like the cut of his jib. (My son was telling yesterday that Brad Pitt's production company has bought the rights to his story by the way!).
What do people think? He seems to me to be by a mile the best of an exceptional ill-equipped bunch.
I have been finding out more about him, and all I have read and hear I like. As a member of the Conservative Party, I shall have a vote and if he is in the final two, he will most certainly get my vote. He seems to have a natural calm authority and is hard-working.
ETA He doesn't sound like the sort of person who wavers if people don't like the sound of his voice or make comments on that.
-
Rory Stewart. Very intelligent, and a lot tougher than he looks. His CV is extraordinary (if true). I don't know if the Tory politicians (or the country's Tories in general) would consider him "their sort of chap", though.
Do you:
1. Get asked to tutor Princes William and Harry in the summer holidays when at university
2. Get appointed as deputy governor of a province in iraq at a ridiculously young age
3. Get asked personally by Prince Charles and the Afghan president to set up a charity
Because:
A. You are the most supremely talented guy around or
B. Because you went to Eton and your father was number two in MI6 providing you with the most astonishingly good network of top establishment people that you (or Daddy) can call up
Discuss.
-
Do you:
1. Get asked to tutor Princes William and Harry in the summer holidays when at university
2. Get appointed as deputy governor of a province in iraq at a ridiculously young age
3. Get asked personally by Prince Charles and the Afghan president to set up a charity
Because:
A. You are the most supremely talented guy around or
B. Because you went to Eton and your father was number two in MI6 providing you with the most astonishingly good network of top establishment people that you (or Daddy) can call up
Discuss.
well I was asked Prof but turned it down , wasn't you? ::)
-
well I was asked Prof but turned it down , wasn't you? ::)
Of course ...
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430
Boris is to appear in court charged with misconduct in public office by lying during the referendum campaign in 2016 by saying the UK was giving £350,000,000 per week to the EU. If guilty, I hope he is banged to rights.
-
Me too!
-
Do you:
1. Get asked to tutor Princes William and Harry in the summer holidays when at university
2. Get appointed as deputy governor of a province in iraq at a ridiculously young age
3. Get asked personally by Prince Charles and the Afghan president to set up a charity
Because:
A. You are the most supremely talented guy around or
B. Because you went to Eton and your father was number two in MI6 providing you with the most astonishingly good network of top establishment people that you (or Daddy) can call up
Discuss.
I’d say B was quite likely in this case. On the other hand, Raab, Johnson, McVey. Hunt. Gove. Stewart seems like a decent person. I hope he’s got a plan though, because if by some strange circumstance he wins, he’ll need something to keep the right wing at bay.
I’m finding it hard to envisage a happy outcome to this crisis we’ve created. (I say ‘we’, I didn’t vote for any of this!)
-
I’d say B was quite likely in this case. On the other hand, Raab, Johnson, McVey. Hunt. Gove. Stewart seems like a decent person. I hope he’s got a plan though, because if by some strange circumstance he wins, he’ll need something to keep the right wing at bay.
I’m finding it hard to envisage a happy outcome to this crisis we’ve created. (I say ‘we’, I didn’t vote for any of this!)
Boris might not be quite so popular now he has this court case hanging over him.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430
Boris is to appear in court charged with misconduct in public office by lying during the referendum campaign in 2016 by saying the UK was giving £350,000,000 per week to the EU. If guilty, I hope he is banged to rights.
His point was that we would take back control of that amount, so potentially it could be spent on the NHS.
-
His point was that we would take back control of that amount, so potentially it could be spent on the NHS.
Really?
-
Spud,
His point was that we would take back control of that amount, so potentially it could be spent on the NHS.
But that "point" was a lie. First, a significant portion of that amount comes back in the form of various grants and incentives, not least to the economically deprived regions that need it most.
Second though, imagine that it cost you £20 to go to car boot sale every Sunday and one day you decided not to bother any more, thereby saving yourself the £20. Good plan right?
Er, probably not if you made a £200 profit when you did go. That's the point - the economic benefit of paying the net amount we actually pay (not least from access to the single market) dwarfs the payment itself. Funnily enough though Boris didn't feel the need to put that on the side of the bus.
-
Do you:
1. Get asked to tutor Princes William and Harry in the summer holidays when at university
2. Get appointed as deputy governor of a province in iraq at a ridiculously young age
3. Get asked personally by Prince Charles and the Afghan president to set up a charity
Because:
A. You are the most supremely talented guy around or
B. Because you went to Eton and your father was number two in MI6 providing you with the most astonishingly good network of top establishment people that you (or Daddy) can call up
Discuss.
B most probably. He seems to have had quite a few leg-ups; but also enough natural talent to acquit himself well in the positions to which he was promoted. Interestingly, he was a fully paid-up Labour member when he was tutoring the royals. I'm pleased to hear that he's quite a linguist, and made good use of this in Afghanistan speaking Dari to the locals.
Two quite revealing paragraphs from a recent Evening Standard article:
Is he tough enough to be PM? A toothy grin spreads across his face. “The reason I have been proud to be in Iraq, in Afghanistan, serving my country is because I believe in a Britain that is understated in its answers to those kind of questions. I don’t believe tough guys are people who say they are tough.”
Later he tells an anecdote from Afghanistan. He was in a blizzard following 9/11, “completely lost.” “Suddenly I saw bumping towards me two big Toyota Land Cruisers. The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans. He stuck his head out and said: ‘You are a f**king nutter.’ And then wound up the window and drove off.”
-
'The electric window came down, and there was an SAS guy who served with me in the Balkans'
There are elements of the back-story that don't ring true to me.
Read the standard summary bioga and there is always a mention of a military career - alluded to in that quote. However the reality is that he spent 9 months in the Black Watch (his Dad's regiment) at the age of 18 between A levels and heading off to Oxford. There seems to be a certainly amount of hyperbole surrounding him, which he rarely seems to wish to correct.
-
His point was that we would take back control of that amount, so potentially it could be spent on the NHS.
Yes but the whole point was we got a rebate on that amount from the EU, so you would not be taking back control of £350 million. It was a lesser amount all of which had been promised to other interest anyway to tide them over Brexit. Or indeed spent on non-existent ferries.
-
Boris might not be quite so popular now he has this court case hanging over him.
I don’t understand why the whole lot of that Brexit shower haven’t been dragged into court over this. It’s not as if Boris was the only one involved.
-
First of all.it's a real stretch of the law, secondly it's based on Johnson being Mayor and how that is seen. It's a distraction, a waste of time and will just make those who like Johnson see him as a victim.
-
Really?
Yes- that is what he wrote in an article for the Telegraph. I think he meant all the money they sent back, telling us how we had to spend it - that money would be under the UK's control to put into the NHS if it wished.
-
Yes but the whole point was we got a rebate on that amount from the EU, so you would not be taking back control of £350 million. It was a lesser amount all of which had been promised to other interest anyway to tide them over Brexit. Or indeed spent on non-existent ferries.
All the same, the slogan was accurate, as £350 million is the amount that we send Brussels that could be spent on the NHS.
-
All the same, the slogan was accurate, as £350 million is the amount that we send Brussels that could be spent on the NHS.
Which bit of rebate aren't you getting?
The money we get as a rebate is already spent. So say we get £100 million rebate (I can't remember the actual figure off hand) that is already spent by HMGovernment. Therefore we do not have £350 million to spend on the NHS. So the slogan was not accurate.
Anyway the amount the nation has already lost because of this ongoing fiasco far outweights the paltry sum involved. We aren't going to see a positive return financially on leaving, this side of the next millennium.
-
Yes- that is what he wrote in an article for the Telegraph. I think he meant all the money they sent back, telling us how we had to spend it - that money would be under the UK's control to put into the NHS if it wished.
You think? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! ::)
-
You think? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! ::)
You don't sound convinced...
-
You don't sound convinced...
Boris knowingly lied, imo.
-
The money we get as a rebate is already spent. So say we get £100 million rebate (I can't remember the actual figure off hand) that is already spent by HMGovernment.
What he's saying is, we can spend the rebate how we want to, rather than how we're told to.
-
Spud,
All the same, the slogan was accurate, as £350 million is the amount that we send Brussels that could be spent on the NHS.
It's only accurate inasmuch it's accurate that you'd have £20 to spend on something else if you didn't go the car boot sale any more. Do you not think that being much worse off because you wouldn't make your profit any more is more relevantly accurate? It's possible in other words lie by omission as well as by commission.
-
What he's saying is, we can spend the rebate how we want to, rather than how we're told to.
Boris stated that the UK gives £350,000,000 per week to the EU, which is apparently untrue.
-
Spud,
It's only accurate inasmuch it's accurate that you'd have £20 to spend on something else if you didn't go the car boot sale any more. Do you not think that being much worse off because you wouldn't make your profit any more is more relevantly accurate? It's possible in other words lie by omission as well as by commission.
But there might be a bigger profit to be made by spending it differently for all we know. For example, a healthier nation could be a more prosperous nation, hence the idea to invest in the NHS. Why should we commit a proportion of our wealth to the same cause for ever and ever? We have the right to change who we give to.
Personally I think we are better off giving it to Europe, but if someone wants to do a free trade deal with somewhere else and invest elsewhere, he's entitled to try and sell that idea.
-
Boris stated that the UK gives £350,000,000 per week to the EU, which is apparently untrue.
It is certainly untrue - it implies there is a financial transaction from the UK to the EU of the equivalent of £350m every week. There is no such transaction. The key point being that the so called 'rebate' is applied before any transfer of funds from the UK to the EU.
-
It is certainly untrue - it implies there is a financial transaction from the UK to the EU of the equivalent of £350m every week. There is no such transaction. The key point being that the so called 'rebate' is applied before any transfer of funds from the UK to the EU.
Ah, thanks PD, I stand corrected. So it's also untrue that the UK 'sends' the EU £350m a week, which is the claim on the side of the bus.
-
All the same, the slogan was accurate, as £350 million is the amount that we send Brussels that could be spent on the NHS.
Ah, no. Wales and Cornwall and all the other economically challenged areas that are currently in receipt of EU handouts want a word with you.
-
As far as I can see all the Tory wannabe leaders think the electorate would vote for a Corbyn/Labour government in an election.
Shouldn't they just admit failure and stand down now?
-
So Michael Gove took cocaine. Well!
He is behaving as though he is making a confession and hoping that the electorate will absolve him. I'm not sure that that the electorate is particularly bothered (well, it wasn't when Cameron's phallic adventures with a pig's head were revealed) but a consequence may be that if he he has been less than honest when entering the USA, we may have a prime minister who can only further the "special relationship" on Whats App.
-
So Michael Gove took cocaine. Well!
He is behaving as though he is making a confession and hoping that the electorate will absolve him. I'm not sure that that the electorate is particularly bothered (well, it wasn't when Cameron's phallic adventures with a pig's head were revealed) but a consequence may be that if he he has been less than honest when entering the USA, we may have a prime minister who can only further the "special relationship" on Whats App.
Don't forget that the electorate in this case is the membership of the Conservative Party. The demographic is different to the demographic of the electorate of the country.
-
Indeed it is, jeremyp, thank you for pointing this out.
-
Don't forget that the electorate in this case is the membership of the Conservative Party. The demographic is different to the demographic of the electorate of the country.
Johnson's tactics seem targeted directly to getting that vote and eff parliament, buiseness and everyone else.
-
I'd vote Rory if I was Tory, but I'm Green, so I vote Caroleen.
-
I'd vote Rory if I was Tory, but I'm Green, so I vote Caroleen.
I say to the Tories 'I'm sick of ya', so I vote Nicola.
-
I always vote when I am able. There's no-one better than Vince Cable.
-
A lot of people voted for Cameron, and now we have Götterdämmerung.
-
I'd vote Rory if I was Tory, but I'm Green, so I vote Caroleen.
I think a lot of non tories would vote for Rory, which is exactly why he hasn't a hope in hell's chance of winning. What matters is how tory MPs vote and then tory members. I suspect Rory may have reasonable support amongst the former, but the latter are never going to support him and that will ultimately limit his support amongst moderate MPs. They know putting Rory up against an uber tub thumping brexiteers to the membership will result in a right wing equivalent of Corbyn being elected leader, but not just of the opposition but PM too.
-
I think a lot of non tories would vote for Rory, which is exactly why he hasn't a hope in hell's chance of winning. What matters is how tory MPs vote and then tory members. I suspect Rory may have reasonable support amongst the former, but the latter are never going to support him and that will ultimately limit his support amongst moderate MPs. They know putting Rory up against an uber tub thumping brexiteers to the membership will result in a right wing equivalent of Corbyn being elected leader, but not just of the opposition but PM too.
Someone said much the same on facebook: he's too popular (or not unpopular enough) with non-tories for tories to vote for him in any numbers.
-
Mark Harper is like The Silence in Doctor Who. If I am not looking at a picture of him, I forget he is in the race.
-
Someone said much the same on facebook: he's too popular (or not unpopular enough) with non-tories for tories to vote for him in any numbers.
I think all it would take is for him to develop some baritonal resonance in his light tenor tones. People are prepared to listen to Boris, not because he's got a consistent political message, or because he's intent on working for the good of the country, but simply because his voice can sound authoritative (that's when he's not sounding like Frankie Howerd on speed).
-
;D
-
Rumours this morning that Hancock could pull out. If he does, as the other candidate on at least nodding terms with sanity I wonder whether his backers would move disproportionately toward Rory Stewart. Just a thought.
-
Rumours this morning that Hancock could pull out. If he does, as the other candidate on at least nodding terms with sanity I wonder whether his backers would move disproportionately toward Rory Stewart. Just a thought.
Hancock has pulled out.
Don't think Rory Stewart has any hope of coming close to being in the final 2. He is the candidate that most non-tories like best, which is because he is the least tory of the candidates - and that is why most tories (MPs and members) wont support him ... unfortunately.
-
The numbers are such that unless Johnson bleeds support there aren't enough votes to have 2 candidates defeat him. And if it goes to the members he will win unless he does something so extraordinarily idiotic, then he is pretty well certain to win.
-
... he will win unless he does something so extraordinarily idiotic, then he is pretty well certain to win.
Agree, but then if there is one person who you'd bank on to do something extraordinarily idiotic, it has to be Boris.
-
Agree, but then if there is one person who you'd bank on to do something extraordinarily idiotic, it has to be Boris.
Well, as always I find Boris Johnson's voice and manner totally unconvincing. I shall get to whichever meeting is held nearest to me (in fact the local Association are going to organise a coach if necessary) and I'll be voting for the second candidate,even if it's Michael Gove! The only way that would change would be if said second candidate made a complete idiot of himself on the occasion, in which case I might have to spoil the ballot paper or something.
-
Well, as always I find Boris Johnson's voice and manner totally unconvincing. I shall get to whichever meeting is held nearest to me (in fact the local Association are going to organise a coach if necessary) and I'll be voting for the second candidate,even if it's Michael Gove! The only way that would change would be if said second candidate made a complete idiot of himself on the occasion, in which case I might have to spoil the ballot paper or something.
You're a Tory? I've sudden;y gone right off you.
-
You're a Tory? I've sudden;y gone right off you.
:D :D I am of course shaking in my shoes!! :)
-
Johnathan Pye on the tory leadership race. Brilliant stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hrTK-OWYIs
Warning: contains language that those of a sensitive disposition may find challenging. Strap in!
-
:D :D I am of course shaking in my shoes!! :)
Been thinking about why the notion that party membership selection the next PM is such a problem - I think it is because it runs counter to the convention of selection of a PM, who is effectively the lead of the group of elected MPs who are in a position to form a government.
So, of course, the best situation is that a PM is elected as the result of a general election.
But if not (as in this case where the PM is changed mid-term) then I think it is better that the PM is selected by the parliamentary party, in other words the MPs, who have a democratic mandate. To allow members (who have no democratic mandate) to make that selection seems to run against democratic principles.
So I'm more comfortable with the approach that resulted in May, Brown or Major (chosen by MPs without resorting to the membership) rather than the current approach, where the choice (unless everyone but Boris pulls out) will be in the hands of the membership.
I have no issue with the leader of a party not in power being selected by party membership because they will only end up as PM if they gain a democratic mandate, but not for selecting the leader of a party already in government.
-
Been thinking about why the notion that party membership selection the next PM is such a problem - I think it is because it runs counter to the convention of selection of a PM, who is effectively the lead of the group of elected MPs who are in a position to form a government.
So, of course, the best situation is that a PM is elected as the result of a general election.
But if not (as in this case where the PM is changed mid-term) then I think it is better that the PM is selected by the parliamentary party, in other words the MPs, who have a democratic mandate. To allow members (who have no democratic mandate) to make that selection seems to run against democratic principles.
So I'm more comfortable with the approach that resulted in May, Brown or Major (chosen by MPs without resorting to the membership) rather than the current approach, where the choice (unless everyone but Boris pulls out) will be in the hands of the membership.
I have no issue with the leader of a party not in power being selected by party membership because they will only end up as PM if they gain a democratic mandate, but not for selecting the leader of a party already in government.
But the Party have done the choosing anyway by whittling it down to two, so I don't think there is much controversy there.
-
But the Party have done the choosing anyway by whittling it down to two, so I don't think there is much controversy there.
But the final choice rests with the members (who have no democratic mandate nor accountability) not the MPs (who do).
-
But the final choice rests with the members (who have no democratic mandate nor accountability) not the MPs (who do).
Not convinced that the first choice of MPs and membership won't be the same here. In that instance your issue becomes moot surely?
-
Not convinced that the first choice of MPs and membership won't be the same here. In that instance your issue becomes moot surely?
They might but they might not.
And importantly MPs may well vote in a different manner knowing that they are only selecting the final 2 who will go to the members, than if they were making the final selection themselves.
And the main point remains that the PM will be selected by unelected and unaccountable members of the tory party, not by MPs who themselves have a democratic mandate.
-
They might but they might not.
And importantly MPs may well vote in a different manner knowing that they are only selecting the final 2 who will go to the members, than if they were making the final selection themselves.
And the main point remains that the PM will be selected by unelected and unaccountable members of the tory party, not by MPs who themselves have a democratic mandate.
Yes, they might not. But if they are then so what.
-
Yes, they might not. But if they are then so what.
So what? Our PM will be selected by a group of individuals who are neither representative nor in any way have a democratic mandate.
-
So what? Our PM will be selected by a group of individuals who are neither representative nor in any way have a democratic mandate.
But if the choice would have been the same, your point is specious.
-
But if the choice would have been the same, your point is specious.
But we can never know if that would have been the case, for the reasons I mentioned previously.
-
But we can never know if that would have been the case, for the reasons I mentioned previously.
You mean your massive 'what if'? What are the odds on a large majority for one candidate being affected by that.
And that's without the myth that in a GE the public, other than those in the various leader's constituencies, are electing a PM
-
You mean your massive 'what if'? What are the odds on a large majority for one candidate being affected by that.
How MPs vote when selecting 2 people to go to a final members ballot is likely to be different to how they would vote if they were voting for the leader themselves. Boris isn't popular in the parliamentary party, but MPs recognise that he is popular enough to end up at least second and therefore likely to win through under the members ballot - hence they are more likely to be seen to support (remember there are cabinet places on offer). Were it down to MPs alone, I would speculate that Hunt would be more popular than Boris.
And that's without the myth that in a GE the public, other than those in the various leader's constituencies, are electing a PM
True, in theory, but not really in practice as the electorate wherever they are will be swayed by the leaders of the various parties in terms of choice of vote, regardless of which constituency they are in. And it is pretty clear that if party x gets a majority then the leader of party x will be PM, hence de facto a vote for party x is a vote for that person to be PM.
-
Isn't Johnson's biggest assert Corbyn? To most if not all tory MPs the idea of Corbyn as PM is kryptonite, and rightly or wrongly Johnson is seen as the only proven vote winner come a GE so no matter they think of him they'll hold their noses and vote Boris. If it's a choice between a lying, morally bankrupt incompetent and an unreformed marxist the lying, morally bankrupt incompetent wins.
-
Don't forget that there are a number of examples where MPs choice of leader hasn't aligned with member's choice and the members view won out. So far none of those examples are for PM as there has never been a case where a leader of the governing party has been selected by members - May, Brown, Major, Callaghan ... were all selected by the MPs of the governing party alone.
But for opposition leaders, step forward:
Corbyn
Miliband E
IDS
All preferred/elected by the members despite not being first choice of the MPs
-
So the Tory party membership, who it seems are now largely infected by Brexit zealotry, are to choose between a pair of incompetent fuckwits: the favourite is the incompetent fuckwit who is a racist liar, as opposed to the other who is merely an incompetent fuckwit (albeit a good one as his handling of the NHS in England and Wales confirms), where the latter incompetent fuckwit recently tweeted this nauseating summary
'Reflection on this race: someone who started in care & reformed the education system, someone who took on the hard left and transformed London, the son of a bus driver who became Home Secretary and in case I forgot to mention an entrepreneur...a credit to our brilliant party
We can only hope that events in the forthcoming weeks will see the end of Brexit, the Tory party in its current form, and the UK.
-
So the Tory party membership, who it seems are now largely infected by Brexit zealotry, are to choose between a pair of incompetent fuckwits: the favourite is the incompetent fuckwit who is a racist liar, as opposed to the other who is merely an incompetent fuckwit (albeit a good one as his handling of the NHS in England and Wales confirms), where the latter incompetent fuckwit recently tweeted this nauseating summary
We can only hope that events in the forthcoming weeks will see the end of Brexit, the Tory party in its current form, and the UK.
Not sure I'd describe it in such words, but the lack of talent amongst the contenders is really worrying. I'm struggling to see anyone who looks like a leader, someone who'd command respect around the world.
-
So the Tory party membership, who it seems are now largely infected by Brexit zealotry, are to choose between a pair of incompetent fuckwits: the favourite is the incompetent fuckwit who is a racist liar, as opposed to the other who is merely an incompetent fuckwit (albeit a good one as his handling of the NHS in England and Wales confirms), where the latter incompetent fuckwit recently tweeted this nauseating summary
We can only hope that events in the forthcoming weeks will see the end of Brexit, the Tory party in its current form, and the UK.
Why would you hope for the end of the UK? If Brexit has taught you anything, it should be that trying to secede from unions is a difficult and destructive thing to do at best.
-
Why would you hope for the end of the UK? If Brexit has taught you anything, it should be that trying to secede from unions is a difficult and destructive thing to do at best.
So is staying in a union where the largest of the 4 nations, electorally speaking, has adopted a political outlook that fundamentally differs from that of the other nations, which is especially the case as regards Scotland. So when I hear Tory politicians speak of 'bringing the country together', and yet it also seems the Tory membership value Brexit more than they value Scotland being in the UK, then it seems to me that for as long as large parts of England are in permanent thrall to the Tories (or to the new Brexit party), and since the main opposition party in Westminster is also dysfunctional, then the UK union simply doesn't reflect the political outlook of my nation.
Of course seceding from the UK would be complex but staying part of a union dominated by a party prepared to place Boris Johnson in the driving seat as the UK bus hurtles lemming-like towards the cliff is an even worse option. Brexit will eventually break just about everything and even if, hopefully, it can be avoided enough damage has already been done - and the blame lies with the Tory party who enabled this madness without any due diligence beforehand nor exhibiting any competence afterwards.
-
So is staying in a union where the largest of the 4 nations, electorally speaking, has adopted a political outlook that fundamentally differs from that of the other nations, which is especially the case as regards Scotland. So when I hear Tory politicians speak of 'bringing the country together', and yet it also seems the Tory membership value Brexit more than they value Scotland being in the UK, then it seems to me that for as long as large parts of England are in permanent thrall to the Tories (or to the new Brexit party), and since the main opposition party in Westminster is also dysfunctional, then the UK union simply doesn't reflect the political outlook of my nation.
Of course seceding from the UK would be complex but staying part of a union dominated by a party prepared to place Boris Johnson in the driving seat as the UK bus hurtles lemming-like towards the cliff is an even worse option. Brexit will eventually break just about everything and even if, hopefully, it can be avoided enough damage has already been done - and the blame lies with the Tory party who enabled this madness without any due diligence beforehand nor exhibiting any competence afterwards.
You are not, however, speaking for some, maybe nearly all I don't know, the Scots who voted to remain in the union, or the Conservative members of the Scottish Parliament or those who voted for them, etc, and one could add those who live in Scotland but are not entitled to vote because they are not British subjects or something. To start dividing up peoples instead of working with them is, in my opinion, almost always a backward step.
-
You are not, however, speaking for some, maybe nearly all I don't know, the Scots who voted to remain in the union, or the Conservative members of the Scottish Parliament or those who voted for them, etc, and one could add those who live in Scotland but are not entitled to vote because they are not British subjects or something. To start dividing up peoples instead of working with them is, in my opinion, almost always a backward step.
Pity you support a party that has hounded disabled people to suicide.
-
If I were Scottish, I'm sure I'd be desperate to uncouple my country from England as well. But then there'd be even less of a brake on the Tories' destructive policies and behaviour (not that there's much of one now, I accept). If the nationalists get their wish, will Scotland be prepared to welcome a lot of poor and sick refugees from just down the road?
I keep hearing people comparing Corbyn's Labour to the Tories and saying there's not much to choose - really? Corbyn might be a poor leader who's not currently representing a large swathe of Labour supporters very well, but the idea that his social-democrat policy proposals would be equally as bad as the slash and burn, asset stripping, fundamentally dishonest capitalism we're currently being subjected to is, in my opinion, ridiculous. He was most recently castigated for (again) wanting evidence before making pronouncements on responsibility for a bad action. For saying more or less the same thing as the German foreign minister and the UN, Jeremy Hunt called him "pathetic".
The MPs have voted against the only contender who showed a shred of integrity. What a pity it's no surprise. Whichever one of them gets it, they'll be skewered by Brexit, whether we leave on 31st October or not. As neither Rory Stewart nor Labour will be carrying the can for the disaster, perhaps one or the other will be able to do something to retrieve our politics from the grip of the sociopaths at some point in the future.
-
You are not, however, speaking for some, maybe nearly all I don't know, the Scots who voted to remain in the union, or the Conservative members of the Scottish Parliament or those who voted for them, etc, and one could add those who live in Scotland but are not entitled to vote because they are not British subjects or something.
We were lied to in 2014 when a Tory PM, plus assorted UK-enthusiasts, told us that if we wanted to stay in the EU we definitely needed to stay in the UK - look how that turned out!
To start dividing up peoples instead of working with them is, in my opinion, almost always a backward step.
Therefore Brexit is a backward step?
If the Tories are stupid enough to select Boris Johnson then not only are the Tories finished here in Scotland (though, tbh, they already are due to Brexit) they will have also aided the case for Indyref2: I suppose this is confirmation that some clouds do indeed have silver linings.
-
We were lied to in 2014 when a Tory PM, plus assorted UK-enthusiasts, told us that if we wanted to stay in the EU we definitely needed to stay in the UK - look how that turned out!
Therefore Brexit is a backward step?
If the Tories are stupid enough to select Boris Johnson then not only are the Tories finished here in Scotland (though, tbh, they already are due to Brexit) they will have also aided the case for Indyref2: I suppose this is confirmation that some clouds do indeed have silver linings.
In my opinion, Brexit is a huge mistake.
-
In my opinion, Brexit is a huge mistake.
I shal vote for Jeremy Hunt because he is not Boris.
-
I shal vote for Jeremy Hunt because he is not Boris.
I'll vote for Jack the Ripper because he isn't Shipman
-
I shal vote for Jeremy Hunt because he is not Boris.
He's still Jeremy Hunt though, which is surely enough of a reason not to vote for him.
-
And the rest
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/21/self-abasement-boris-johnson-shameless-gofers?CMP=share_btn_tw
-
We were lied to in 2014 when a Tory PM, plus assorted UK-enthusiasts, told us that if we wanted to stay in the EU we definitely needed to stay in the UK - look how
that turned out!
I thought rather than lying they were mistaken, as they were convinced the majority of people wanted to remain.
-
I thought rather than lying they were mistaken, as they were convinced the majority of people wanted to remain.
We-re talking pre-Brexit, Spud, when during the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum campaign we were told that if we wanted to remain in the EU we should vote to remain part of the UK - then they (the Tory government) enabled the Brexit referendum.
-
So is staying in a union where the largest of the 4 nations, electorally speaking, has adopted a political outlook that fundamentally differs from that of the other nations
Nations don't have opinions, people do. You are ignoring the fact that there are a lot of pro Brexit Scots and a lot of pro Union Scots.
when I hear Tory politicians speak of 'bringing the country together', and yet it also seems the Tory membership value Brexit more than they value Scotland being in the UK
You know that "Tory membership" is only in the thousands? I agree that there is a problem with the current Tory party but you would be wrong to think that people in England are OK with what's going on there.
then it seems to me that for as long as large parts of England are in permanent thrall to the Tories (or to the new Brexit party), and since the main opposition party in Westminster is also dysfunctional, then the UK union simply doesn't reflect the political outlook of my nation.
Guess what. If you get your independence there will still be large parts of your country in thrall to parties whose policies you don't like. It's democracy.
Of course seceding from the UK would be complex but staying part of a union dominated by a party prepared to place Boris Johnson in the driving seat as the UK
You don't honestly think that is going to continue for very long do you? The Tories are finished as a political force. The only thing that keeps them in power is the uselessness of the current Labour leader.
Brexit will eventually break just about everything and even if, hopefully, it can be avoided enough damage has already been done - and the blame lies with the Tory party who enabled this madness without any due diligence beforehand nor exhibiting any competence afterwards.
I completely agree with that but what is unbroken will probably be finished off by Scottish secession.
-
Pity you support a party that has hounded disabled people to suicide.
How did you figure that one out? I don't think I've ever seen Susan claim to support one political party or another.
ETA: OK her "I shall vote for Jeremy Hunt" comment suggests she is a member, but that doesn't mean she supports the policy on disabled people's benefits.
-
We-re talking pre-Brexit, Spud, when during the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum campaign we were told that if we wanted to remain in the EU we should vote to remain part of the UK - then they (the Tory government) enabled the Brexit referendum.
Yes I'm aware of that - presumably the reason they said it was, they weren't planning on holding the Brexit referendum at that point and had little idea how much support there would eventually be for Brexit.
-
Yes I'm aware of that - presumably the reason they said it was, they weren't planning on holding the Brexit referendum at that point and had little idea how much support there would eventually be for Brexit.
Not here in Scotland though: a fact that rarely gets a mention in Toryland, since it seems that the resident Tories there tend to prefer Brexit no matter what - which is especially ironic when they then stupidly bang on about 'uniting the country' while ignoring that parts of 'the country' are not on-side as regards Brexit.
-
Can you specify what is or was not there in Scotland - sorry I'm not quite following you.
-
I'm simply pointing out that, as evidenced by the 2016 EU referendum and in the recent EU elections, that the balance of opinion in Scotland is pro EU and anti-Brexit.
However, when it comes to mainstream political reporting this aspect rarely gets a mention so it is galling to hear, as we did after the recent EU elections, those parties who lost seats concluding that the message from the electorate was that they needed to 'get on and deliver Brexit' when the message from the Scottish electorate is that they should stop Brexit.
Brexit is breaking the UK, and the likely installation of the odious Boris Johnson as PM will exacerbate this.
-
How did you figure that one out? I don't think I've ever seen Susan claim to support one political party or another.
ETA: OK her "I shall vote for Jeremy Hunt" comment suggests she is a member, but that doesn't mean she supports the policy on disabled people's benefits.
She is a member as she makes clear. Being a member of the party means supporting the austerity that has lead to disabled people committing suicide.
-
Gordon, yes I understand- I just wanted to clarify that Cameron and co weren't dishonest at the time. But I totally understand how you feel about the whole thing, and as you know I think the referendum was won by Remain, because the eventual choice is between hard border or soft border or full EU membership, and clearly the 16 million remainers are more than the supporters of either of the other two options. The latter don't admit it though.
-
How did you figure that one out? I don't think I've ever seen Susan claim to support one political party or another.
It so happens that I became a member of the conservative Party a long time ago and, as the Conservative successive MPs in this area have beenthe the sort who did their best, I preferred to remain a member rather than vote for other candidates for other parties; but this has always been done from a point of view that, looking at the options, I still think the Conservative Party, made up of human beings, not superpeople, was my best bet. I used to know a LibDem who was working for that party and, just for fun, I voted for the LibDem candidate in local elections. I knew of course that he didn't stand a chance in this area!
ETA: OK her "I shall vote for Jeremy Hunt" comment suggests she is a member, but that doesn't mean she supports the policy on disabled people's benefits.
I would be daft if I supported everything the Party do, and I can see where there are faults of course, but in general, I'l remain a member of the Conservatives until something much better turns up ... ... by which time I doubt I'll still be alive to vote for it!
For one example: the good local MP is a member of the Commons Bible Study group and supports faith schools. I support the NSS's campaign to challenge at every turn the teaching of any and all faith(s) since not one has an objective fact to back up their 100% faith beliefs.
-
I'm simply pointing out that, as evidenced by the 2016 EU referendum and in the recent EU elections, that the balance of opinion in Scotland is pro EU and anti-Brexit.
However, when it comes to mainstream political reporting this aspect rarely gets a mention
It's not relevant, that's why.
Regions didn't vote in the referendum, people did. Every Scot had exactly the same influence over Brexit as every English person did.
-
Being a member of the party means supporting the austerity that has lead to disabled people committing suicide.
No it doesn't.
-
It's not relevant, that's why.
Regions didn't vote in the referendum, people did. Every Scot had exactly the same influence over Brexit as every English person did.
Thing is though that the results were collated and presented in such as way as to show variations in terms of the 4 nations of the (dis)United Kingdom along with the various geographic areas of each EU referendum breakdown (https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/find-information-by-subject/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/eu-referendum/electorate-and-count-information), which confirms that 2 of the 4 nations had a Remain majority, most notably in the case of Scotland.
As such the 'bring the nation together' rhetoric of some Brexit enthusiasts isn't supported by either the 2016 referendum or the 2019 EU election results. Therefore, should there be a breakdown of the current UK political situation as the result of Brexit happening, or not happening, then surely the view in Scotland is relevant when the main political party here in Scotland is anti-Brexit and pro-independence.
-
Polly Toynbee on the current state of the Tory party: someone needs to put it out of its misery.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2019/jun/22/boris-johnson-character-issue-nation
-
The reaction of some to the reporting of the argument at Johnson's partner's flat makes me think that we are still a long way from understanding how to deal with domestic violence. That calling police when you are worried about a neighbour's safety has been portrayed by some as bad is just scary.
-
The reaction of some to the reporting of the argument at Johnson's partner's flat makes me think that we are still a long way from understanding how to deal with domestic violence. That calling police when you are worried about a neighbour's safety has been portrayed by some as bad is just scary.
I agree , Johnson may have been in danger.
, his partner may have been in danger.
-
The reaction of some to the reporting of the argument at Johnson's partner's flat makes me think that we are still a long way from understanding how to deal with domestic violence. That calling police when you are worried about a neighbour's safety has been portrayed by some as bad is just scary.
The reaction from Jacob Rees Mogg was particularly creepy, but perhaps only to be expected from someone who sees all these matters in terms of people's political motivations. We hear that there were screams of "Get off me! Get out of my flat!" which might suggest that physical assault was involved, particularly since these things were audible from the street.
Rees Mogg reduced this to images of people 'snooping', listening with drinking glasses pressed against walls etc, all with left-wing political motives to undermine the Tory voting procedure.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/24/boris-johnson-prime-minister-tory-party-britain
-
Could have been a spider or something? I think giving the details to the press is not good.
-
Could have been a spider or something? I think giving the details to the press is not good.
A spider. Really?
-
Could have been a spider or something? I think giving the details to the press is not good.
Drivel
-
Simon Heffer, no left winger, on Johnson
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/06/supporting-boris-johnson-desperate-mps-know-they-are-backing-idle-lying?fbclid=IwAR3fdcJUMvc-rW4xMpTCoTm4zZmAMftMSaN3NPj-PXAG-edhsfsrfqCsZYY
-
How Oxford University Union shaped the next PM
https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2
-
One of the - many - things that really annoys me about Boris is that he simply cannot speak coherently.
-
After the unfortunate flapdoodle at his girlfriend's flat (he's old enough to be her father, ffs!), his popularity apparently took as nose-dive, both with the general public and with Tory voters. Could ha actually be about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?
-
After the unfortunate flapdoodle at his girlfriend's flat (he's old enough to be her fsther, ffs!), his popularity apparently took as nose-dive, both with the general public and with Tory voters. Could ha actually be about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?
Still solidly ahead with tory members (the only people with a vote) although the gap has narrowed since red-wine-sofa-gate
-
One of the - many - things that really annoys me about Boris is that he simply cannot speak coherently.
That's an affectation in many ways. He doesn't want to be understood enough to be picked up on his inaccuracies.
-
One of the - many - things that really annoys me about Boris is that he simply cannot speak coherently.
Dissembling and misdirection - essentially to cover up lying and false arguments.
-
OK this has gone beyond parody - watch from 6.01s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=gRHfgF0l1Jc
Boris relaxes by making model buses out of wine boxes :o
-
OK this has gone beyond parody - watch from 6.01s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=gRHfgF0l1Jc
Boris relaxes by making model buses out of wine boxes :o
Doesn't he look tired?
-
Drivel
Put a bib on then.
-
OK this has gone beyond parody - watch from 6.01s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=gRHfgF0l1Jc
Boris relaxes by making model buses out of wine boxes :o
https://politicallanguageuk.wordpress.com/2018/09/14/13-boris-johnson-and-a-dead-cat/
-
Prof,
OK this has gone beyond parody - watch from 6.01s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=gRHfgF0l1Jc
Boris relaxes by making model buses out of wine boxes :o
Presumably someone in his team of minders even as we speak is desperately trying to knock up a cardboard bus and take a photo of it ready for tomorrow's Daily Mail...
-
Prof,
Presumably someone in his team of minders even as we speak is desperately trying to knock up a cardboard bus and take a photo of it ready for tomorrow's Daily Mail...
ooh .. will it have new lies painted on the side ... or just the same old ones?
-
Yesterday I had an e-mail from the Leadership Dept and the subject was: Confirm your attendance at the south central hustings.
I opened it and the content was about the first ballot to reduce the number of MPs wanting to be PM to two. I rang the secretary at the local office and apparently this hustings is tomorrow at The Pavilion in Bournemouth. She said she would see if there was anyone who could take me.
I rang Central Office > Leadership Dept |> hustings dept and told them how inefficient their e-mails are, but insisted they check whether my name was on the list of people to be there. It was, but much as I'd like to go, I'm going to have to stay away because:
- if it is in The Pavilion, they must be expecting a large crowd
-there will be too many hazards for me,even if I had someone guiding me
the person guiding me will not know my difficulties well
it will be dark - for me - inside the theatre and on the way home
etc
I can't see any way I can do it. However, the ballot paper will presumably be sent by post and I know whom to vote for since it will have to be the person who is NOT Boris. I shall not abstain because I shall want to see the numbers for each candidate later on.
-
I've decided that I hope they choose Boris Johnson - perhaps a PM who is an card-carrying incompetent lying fuckwit will prove to be the most effective means of killing off Brexit and also his own party in its current format, since it seems large chunks of the Tory-party membership have largely succumbed to Brexit-mania to the extent of zealotry.
Listening to some of the drivel being directed at Tory party members would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
-
Seen elsewhere 'Jeremy Hunt calling for the new leader to be trustworthy. Is there some 3rd candidate no one knows about?'
-
Guy Verhofstadt on Johnson (from the Grauniad's live politics blog, which notes that 'ensorcelling' means 'bewitching').
Though Johnson will most likely soon find himself in a position where he must make good on his promises, he continues to spread untruths. Chief among them is the myth that Britain can tear up the withdrawal agreement that May negotiated with the EU, withhold its financial commitments to the bloc, and simultaneously start negotiating free-trade deals. To Johnson’s followers, however, he is more prophet than politician: only he can deliver a mythical “true Brexit” that will deliver the prosperity promised during the referendum campaign.
As is often the case with populists, reality does not square with Johnson’s ensorcelling combination of false promises, pseudo-patriotism, and foreigner bashing. He and his fellow Brexiteers speak of a “Global Britain” that will trade freely with the rest of the world, even as they drag their country down a path strewn with uprooted trade ties and substantial new barriers to commerce.
-
There was some online/face book Q and A hour yesterday evening I understand with Conservative members asking questions with Boris and Hunt. Did anyone see any of it?
-
There's a funny piece by Conrad Black in The Spectator about how great Johnson is. My two main takeaways were that Black thinks it's admirable to lie your head off if the lies advance Brexit and that Max Hastings is a relatively decent bloke, capable of changing his mind in the face of evidence.
Support from Conrad Black! How could anyone doubt Johnson's credentials now?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/max-hastings-vs-boris-johnson-i-know-who-id-trust-more/
-
There's a funny piece by Conrad Black in The Spectator about how great Johnson is. My two main takeaways were that Black thinks it's admirable to lie your head off if the lies advance Brexit and that Max Hastings is a relatively decent bloke, capable of changing his mind in the face of evidence.
Support from Conrad Black! How could anyone doubt Johnson's credentials now?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/max-hastings-vs-boris-johnson-i-know-who-id-trust-more/
The usual clickbait from the Speccie, I'm guessing. There are a few writers still on the books whom I would read. Black isn't one of them It is very hard not to think that much of what ones sees and reads in these context isn't satire.
-
There's a funny piece by Conrad Black in The Spectator about how great Johnson is. My two main takeaways were that Black thinks it's admirable to lie your head off if the lies advance Brexit and that Max Hastings is a relatively decent bloke, capable of changing his mind in the face of evidence.
Support from Conrad Black! How could anyone doubt Johnson's credentials now?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/max-hastings-vs-boris-johnson-i-know-who-id-trust-more/
Bizarre. Anyway I can't see how being a decent bloke or trustworthiness even enter in to choosing between Hunt and Johnson .. both are pushing impossible propositions.
-
The various photo ops and set ups are a procession of the grotesque wankfests celebrating the slowest car crash in history,
-
Reading the political blogs today you have to wonder how anyone (even the most rabid of Brexit-happy Tories) could believe the evermore hawkish and deranged nonsense these two fuckwits are coming out with.
-
According to someone on Radio 4 this morning, it would be against WTO rules for the government to subsidize specific farmers and fishermen who sell goods to the EU and have to pay tariffs, unless the subsidies include all fishermen and farmers.
-
According to someone on Radio 4 this morning, it would be against WTO rules for the government to subsidize specific farmers and fishermen who sell goods to the EU and have to pay tariffs, unless the subsidies include all fishermen and farmers.
If so then these guys are making stuff up as they go along and either would be dangerous as PM. I'd imagine though that no matter who the Tory faithful choose reality will expose their lies and false promises.
Brexit looks likely to break current politics, which is probably no bad thing - the question is what comes next.
-
the question is what comes next.
What was the general outcome of the EU elections, in terms of how many voters support Brexit and how many don't? Does the success of the Brexit Party mean that there are now more Leave than Remain supporters?
-
What was the general outcome of the EU elections, in terms of how many voters support Brexit and how many don't? Does the success of the Brexit Party mean that there are now more Leave than Remain supporters?
Taking the last one first - no - since they didn't get a majority. As to the rest of it - despite the idea that you can take votes for parties opposed to Brexit vs those in favour - it's not a single issue election for parties other than the Brexit party so impossible to tell. Current polls tend to put remain in a small lead but those are just polls. In one sense the numbers of the public don't matter, it's the numbers in the HoC that do.
-
ISTM that even if Remain would now win a referendum by a couple of percentage points, it is unlikely that the UK could make a success of membership and future progress of the EU as a political union with a such a large, say 48%, Leave faction .
It would probably be best to cut our losses and leave with acceptance of the WA and negotiating a reasonable long term economic arrangement - but neither Hunt or Johnson are heading for this either.
-
ISTM that even if Remain would now win a referendum by a couple of percentage points, it is unlikely that the UK could make a success of membership and future progress of the EU as a political union with a such a large, say 48%, Leave faction .
It would probably be best to cut our losses and leave with acceptance of the WA and negotiating a reasonable long term economic arrangement - but neither Hunt or Johnson are heading for this either.
The issue though is surely whether such a thing is possible with the numbers in the HoC. The way Hunt and Johnson are heading has election written over it - not that that will solve anything either
-
The issue though is surely whether such a thing is possible with the numbers in the HoC. The way Hunt and Johnson are heading has election written over it - not that that will solve anything either
True enough.
Without an election we will likely drift into no deal. An election may or may not resolve anything depending on actual manifestos and leadership.
-
True enough.
Without an election we will likely drift into no deal. An election may or may not resolve anything depending on actual manifestos and leadership.
The problem there is we're back at the point you made about the country being pretty equally split on the issue. Add to that that any elections cannot be solely about Brexit, and it seems to me to be just another delay.
-
Current predictions on Electoral Calculus based on running Poll of Polls is 'interesting'
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
-
Saw that Jeremy Hunt was being accused of a reverse ferret on fox hunting elsewhere which prompted me to look to see where the phrase came from. In turn that led to reading the delightful snippet below
'In 2014, the Mayor of New York performed a literal reverse ferret when he repealed a ban on owning domesticated ferrets within the city.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_ferret
-
So the latest polls seem to indicate a landslide for the dangerous lying incompetent racist who is possibly going to prorogue parliament.
-
So the latest polls seem to indicate a landslide for the dangerous lying incompetent racist who is possibly going to prorogue parliament.
So it could go either way, then.
-
So it could go either way, then.
No, Hunt isn't in favour of proroguing
-
So Darroch has fallen on his own sword, that the dickhead Johnson held. Johnson is a disgrace.
-
So the latest polls seem to indicate a landslide for the dangerous lying incompetent racist who is possibly going to prorogue parliament.
As long as the referendum result is fully honoured, I'd even support Margaret T, if she was still around.
ippy
-
So Darroch has fallen on his own sword, that the dickhead Johnson held. Johnson is a disgrace.
He had no choice once those emails were leaked. He could no longer work with the Trump administration so he couldn't do his job. This is actually a disastrous episode. Whoever leaked those emails needs to go to prison.
-
As long as the referendum result is fully honoured, I'd even support Margaret T, if she was still around.
ippy
So, ippy, did the referendum result specify that a 'no deal' exit from the EU masterminded by a bunch of right-wing incompetent lying fuckwits should be considered as being an acceptable approach to take?
In any event the referendum has been shown to be worthless as a meaningful policy imperative in that the simplistic 'Remain vs Leave' question clearly, as has been shown, bears no relationship to the actually complexities of 'leave' (even ignoring Tory incompetence): so any shouts of '17.4 million voted for it ' is just a fallacious ad pop.
Mind you, the fat lady has yet to sing and since it seems we are about to see a particularly incompetent and lying fuckwit become PM there must be a chance that either he will mismanage affairs, or failing that some of the grown-ups in Westminster will intervene, so that Brexit is stopped.
-
As long as the referendum result is fully honoured, I'd even support Margaret T, if she was still around.
What do you mean by fully honoured
Sure the only thing that was asked (and has a mandate) is to leave the EU - which is binary, we are a member or we are not a member, there is nothing 'fully' about it.
I guess you could argue that 'fully' in this context means what was promised by the leave side in the referendum debate - if that's the case leaving without a deal wouldn't be honouring the referendum result as no-one on the leave side was suggesting that is what we should do in the run up to the referendum. No-one can legitimately claim that there is a mandate for no deal.
-
What disappoints me about this miserable affair is the spineless response from the Government.
Trump should have been told firmly that he was meddling in affairs which were none of his business. He should have been asked if his ambassador was sending confidential evaluations of the state of UK government - and if so, toid to withdraw him immediately.
Theresa May should have publicly informed him that he was totally unqualified to provide any form of advice about matters he did not understand. No doubt she is currently wondering whether her visit to Washington, shortly after Trump became president, during which they were filmed walking hand in hand, was not the most stupid decision she had ever made.
-
He should have been asked if his ambassador was sending confidential evaluations of the state of UK government
Of course he is. That's part of his job.
Kim Darroch absolutely had to resign, but not because he's sending critical reports of the US government back to Britain (which is his job), but because they have become public. Darroch can no longer work with the US government which is the other part of his job. It's not his fault, it is the fault of whoever leaked a confidential communication. That person must be caught and prosecuted. They have
a) damaged diplomatic relations with an administration known for its capriciousness
b) deprived us of a good ambassador
c) wrecked a man's career
d) made it hard for Darroch's successor - or any ambassador - to send back honest appraisals of bad regimes for fear of those appraisals being leaked and ending their career.
There is nothing good about this affair whatsoever.
-
Of course he is. That's part of his job.
And I am well aware of this. What you are missing from my comment is my implied irony. And that I think that this is an instance where the best response to a bully is to stand up to him.
You are entirely correct in stating that the person who leaked the ambassador's emails should be cought, tried and (hopefully) punished. I also think that Trump should be told - in no uncertain terms - to keep his nose out of other countries' business.
-
Of course he is. That's part of his job.
Kim Darroch absolutely had to resign, but not because he's sending critical reports of the US government back to Britain (which is his job), but because they have become public. Darroch can no longer work with the US government which is the other part of his job. It's not his fault, it is the fault of whoever leaked a confidential communication. That person must be caught and prosecuted. They have
a) damaged diplomatic relations with an administration known for its capriciousness
b) deprived us of a good ambassador
c) wrecked a man's career
d) made it hard for Darroch's successor - or any ambassador - to send back honest appraisals of bad regimes for fear of those appraisals being leaked and ending their career.
There is nothing good about this affair whatsoever.
Don't disagree - but Johnson's prevarication in the debate is to my mind more dangerous in that in not defending Darroch for doing his job, he politicised the post to be about his own ambitions, and given he is likely to win, it undermines every diplomat we have because their PM will not have been willing to defend them for doing their job.
-
Don't disagree - but Johnson's prevarication in the debate is to my mind more dangerous in that in not defending Darroch for doing his job, he politicised the post to be about his own ambitions, and given he is likely to win, it undermines every diplomat we have because their PM will not have been willing to defend them for doing their job.
I'll be honest: I haven't been keeping up with what the two candidates have been saying. The whole thing just makes me want to cry, so I'm not really up with what Boris has said about this incident. If he has been critical of Darroch, then you are absolutely right. No ambassador will ever tell the truth to Boris as PM, they'll tell him what he wants to hear.
-
I'll be honest: I haven't been keeping up with what the two candidates have been saying. The whole thing just makes me want to cry, so I'm not really up with what Boris has said about this incident. If he has been critical of Darroch, then you are absolutely right. No ambassador will ever tell the truth to Boris as PM, they'll tell him what he wants to hear.
He wasn't so much critical non supportive. He left his idiot supporter, Ross Thomson, to say ' I don't think you defend diplomats when it's against the national interest' which automatically undermines all our diplomats.
-
He wasn't so much critical non supportive. He left his idiot supporter, Ross Thomson, to say ' I don't think you defend diplomats when it's against the national interest' which automatically undermines all our diplomats.
Yep, that'll do it.
Boris is unfit to lead a country. We can only hope, if he wins, the government collapses at the first opportunity.
-
Yep, that'll do it.
Boris is unfit to lead a country. We can only hope, if he wins, the government collapses at the first opportunity.
He has one principle which is 'I Love Me'.
-
Since our next glorious leader will no doubt trigger a ministerial merry-go-round, with familiar faces heading off into the sunset - an entertaining look at one: the utterly useless Grayling.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/exit-failing-grayling-the-3bn-master-of-disaster-bows-out
-
This also from The Guardian highlights the problem we have with Trump and Boris (and some others).
Basically it boils down to if you feel no shame then it is impossible to shame you.
https://tinyurl.com/Liarsandguff
-
Boris hasn't even taken power but he's already had a defeat and a rebellion.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/tory-rebels-send-stark-warning-to-boris-johnson-over-no-deal-brexit
-
Boris hasn't even taken power but he's already had a defeat and a rebellion.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/tory-rebels-send-stark-warning-to-boris-johnson-over-no-deal-brexit
It is going to be an extremely bumpy ride for Boris, possibly even not being able to gain the confidence of the house.
He is also likely to see a by-election loss (of a current Tory seat) within a week or so of taking office.
-
I've no idea whether Boris'll make a good or bad job of P M, the only bonus I can see to having him as P M is it seems to be pissing off the remoaners, (remoaners the ones that lost the democratic referendum).
ippy
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
That he's a lying racist incompetent narcissist is obviously fine by you because it's just like the god you worship. Johnson is less of a thug, his vague involvement in planning to assault someone is nothing on the genocidal loon you love.
-
I've no idea whether Boris'll make a good or bad job of P M, the only bonus I can see to having him as P M is it seems to be pissing off the remoaners, (remoaners the ones that lost the democratic referendum).
I find it interesting that, even though the Brexiteers won the referendum, they are the ones resorting to snide insults.
Instead of whinging at us, why don't you do something to sort out the calamitous mess your leaders have created?
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
The choice made by the people who voted in a referendum one day three years ago.
You don't know what the will of the people is today.
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
People in some bits of the country, Alan, and by a minority in my nation. That the Tory party inflicts on us a lying and incompetent fuckwit as PM is something that they will regret in due course, and hopefully the UK electorate will punish the Tory party in due course.
I suspect too that the enthusiasm and confidence some have in this clown will be misplaced and it wouldn't be in the least surprised that all the wee Brexit enthusiasts, who are this evening rubbing thier hands in glee, might well end up not getting that which they crave - I hope so.
On the bright side, and if Brexit does happen, his selection will be a positive one for those of us who wish to extricate Scotland from this mess.
-
Well I am sure Mr Putin will be pleased. He'll have at least three comedy shows to watch.
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
Which country? This country - Scotland -last voted Tory majority in the days of MacMillan.
This country did not vote for May, nor did we have a chance to tell johnson where to go.
This country in common with Northern Ireland rejected leaving the EU.
This country has been ignored for too long.
-
At last we have a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country.
No matter what.
-
Which country? This country - Scotland -last voted Tory majority in the days of MacMillan.
This country did not vote for May, nor did we have a chance to tell johnson where to go.
This country in common with Northern Ireland rejected leaving the EU.
This country has been ignored for too long.
I appreciate your concerns for Scotland, but much of my concern goes to the poorest countries of this world who are forced to pay exorbitant tariffs to the EU in order to export their produce into Europe.
-
I appreciate your concerns for Scotland, but much of my concern goes to the poorest countries of this world who are forced to pay exorbitant tariffs to the EU in order to export their produce into Europe.
Agreed....but much of MY concern is based on the inhuman Westminster austerity policies which have led to a disasterous increase of suicides due to the infamous universal credit, and the distressing need for food banks, which are now, in many cases, struggling to meet the needs of those who have literally nothing.
-
John Crace, in good form.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-first-policy-unites-uk-by-blaming-half-the-country-for-our-problems
-
I appreciate your concerns for Scotland, but much of my concern goes to the poorest countries of this world who are forced to pay exorbitant tariffs to the EU in order to export their produce into Europe.
So please explain how having, as you put it, "a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country", or more accurately, a lying narcissist who is committed to forcing through a kind of Brexit that bears no resemblance to anything mentioned during the referendum, almost certainly against the wishes of the majority of the country, inflicting extensive and totally unnecessary damage to the country, its standing in the world, and its economy, and losing all influence on the EU, is going to help these poorest countries? Do you really think Boris gives a flying fuck about them?
-
He has one principle which is 'I Love Me'.
which I'm guessing you can easily associate with !
Smh x
-
So please explain how having, as you put it, "a leader who is committed to honouring the choice made by the people of this country", or more accurately, a lying narcissist who is committed to forcing through a kind of Brexit that bears no resemblance to anything mentioned during the referendum, almost certainly against the wishes of the majority of the country, inflicting extensive and totally unnecessary damage to the country, its standing in the world, and its economy, and losing all influence on the EU, is going to help these poorest countries? Do you really think Boris gives a flying fuck about them?
Ah, Boris. Our national hero.
Alexander Boris Piffle Johnson - demonstrating his completely open approach to the challenges ahead. Always open - well, his mouth and his flies are ...
-
I appreciate your concerns for Scotland, but much of my concern goes to the poorest countries of this world who are forced to pay exorbitant tariffs to the EU in order to export their produce into Europe.
Hi Alan. It seems to me that you're applying the same intellectual rigour to your views on Brexit as you do to your religious beliefs. I.e. none. Do some research on the EU policy on tariffs relating to the world's poorest countries instead of swallowing liars' lies whole. Given all the evidence of the lies told by Leavers over the last 3+ years, anyone with any sense would be double checking if one of them told you it was sunny today.
https://fullfact.org/europe/out-africa-facts-about-eu-tariffs-african-exports/
I'm thinking of placing a bet that we will still be in the EU on November 1st, as Alexander Johnson has stated so confidently that we will not.
-
Hi Alan. It seems to me that you're applying the same intellectual rigour to your views on Brexit as you do to your religious beliefs. I.e. none. Do some research on the EU policy on tariffs relating to the world's poorest countries instead of swallowing liars' lies whole. Given all the evidence of the lies told by Leavers over the last 3+ years, anyone with any sense would be double checking if one of them told you it was sunny today.
https://fullfact.org/europe/out-africa-facts-about-eu-tariffs-african-exports/
I'm thinking of placing a bet that we will still be in the EU on November 1st, as Alexander Johnson has stated so confidently that we will not.
I hope you're right!! I don't like the sound of that Adviser Boris has appointed.
-
John Crace yet again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/25/dont-call-it-a-coup-youll-spoil-boris-johnsons-big-day-out
-
Which country? This country - Scotland -last voted Tory majority in the days of MacMillan.
This country did not vote for May, nor did we have a chance to tell johnson where to go.
This country in common with Northern Ireland rejected leaving the EU.
This country has been ignored for too long.
He means the UK.
Scotland did not reject leaving the EU. Scotland was not asked about leaving the EU. Neither were any of the other regions of the UK. The referendum was a referendum of the people of the UK. Each person had exactly one vote.
-
I appreciate your concerns for Scotland, but much of my concern goes to the poorest countries of this world who are forced to pay exorbitant tariffs to the EU in order to export their produce into Europe.
And you seriously think matters will improve with Britain not in the EU?
How do you think it will be better for these poor countries wit us not in the EU?
-
He means the UK.
Scotland did not reject leaving the EU. Scotland was not asked about leaving the EU. Neither were any of the other regions of the UK. The referendum was a referendum of the people of the UK. Each person had exactly one vote.
Sadly Anchorman is unable to see anything other than through the narrow optic of petty nationalism.
-
Sadly Anchorman is unable to see anything other than through the narrow optic of petty nationalism.
The problem remains that Scotland, and, more to the point, Northern Ireland, are being ignored.
Westminster can ignore Scotland - they are experts at it - but they ignore the wishes of the majority in Northern Ireland at their - and our - peril.
-
The problem remains that Scotland, and, more to the point, Northern Ireland, are being ignored.
You can't help yourself can you - you are unable to see things other than in the nationalistic terms of Scotland, NI and presumably England and Wales.
The area where I live voted very slightly more remain than Scotland - why aren't you claiming St Albans is being ignored. London voted heavily remain - surely London is being ignored just as much as Scotland, and there are considerably more people in the former than the latter.
The reality is that the wishes of 48% of the people who voted in the referendum are being ignored - but that is what happens in a democratic process.
Westminster can ignore Scotland - they are experts at it - but they ignore the wishes of the majority in Northern Ireland at their - and our - peril.
I agree on the latter point about NI, but not on nationalistic grounds. There are special obligations that the government has to the people living on the island of Ireland due to the Good Friday Agreement and nothing that the Government does in terms of brexit must limit those obligations because brexit does not and cannot trump the GFA.
-
Which country? This country - Scotland -last voted Tory majority in the days of MacMillan.
This country did not vote for May, nor did we have a chance to tell johnson where to go.
This country in common with Northern Ireland rejected leaving the EU.
This country has been ignored for too long.
You could say the same about Liverpool or Manchester or Newcastle or East London.
Why is Scotland being ignored any more than those places?
-
The problem remains that Scotland, and, more to the point, Northern Ireland, are being ignored.
Lots of people are being ignored. People are screaming that Brexit is a terrible idea from all parts of the UK, not just Scotland. About one voter in three in Scotland voted for Brexit. When you say Scotland wants to stay in the EU, you whitewash a third of your voters out of existence.
Please stop making Brexit a petty Scottish independence issue.
-
Lots of people are being ignored. People are screaming that Brexit is a terrible idea from all parts of the UK, not just Scotland. About one voter in three in Scotland voted for Brexit. When you say Scotland wants to stay in the EU, you whitewash a third of your voters out of existence.
Please stop making Brexit a petty Scottish independence issue.
Strange how petty nationalists think only of countries rather than people.
-
This thing of ignoring the views of people on the losing side of a vote is profoundly undemocratic in any case.
Deliberately pissing them off as ippy suggested above is a clear path to collapse.
-
This thing of ignoring the views of people on the losing side of a vote is profoundly undemocratic in any case.
Deliberately pissing them off as ippy suggested above is a clear path to collapse.
Essentially, the referendum was asking if people wanted to change from the status quo. Just over a third of the electorate chose this option.
Since, legally, the referendum was advisory not mandatory, which was the "losing" side?
-
Strange how petty nationalists think only of countries rather than people.
I'm thinking of both.
Both countries - Northern Ireland and Scotland -voted to remain.
Ignoring that fact, especially in the case of the former, may well have serious consequences.
I have a contact in the Corymeela Community - the Irish equivalent of the Iona community - a group dedicated to reconciliation and peaceful co-existance. They were background hosts to much of the groundwork which led to the Good Friday agreement.
They try to keep in contact with both sides of the sectarian divide, and I'm told that several republican elements outwith the control of Sinn Fein have gone very quiet since February.
When these particular elements 'go quiet' that means they stop attending reconciliation meetings and sever contacts with neutral liasons.
If Northern Ireland is pulled out of the EU against her will, you can bet whinging will be the least of her problems.
The situation as it exists at present is not perfect by any means, but it has, by and large, worked.
Change it and the balance will shift; other republican elements, at the moment content to lie low, will not wish to be seen as doing nothing while the 'extreme extremists' act.
Is this a price worth paying?
-
Essentially, the referendum was asking if people wanted to change from the status quo. Just over a third of the electorate chose this option.
Since, legally, the referendum was advisory not mandatory, which was the "losing" side?
I liked this from elsewhere: "Boris became PM with 92k votes. Boaty McBoatface got 124k and was overruled for being a bloody stupid idea...."
-
I'm thinking of both.
Both countries - Northern Ireland and Scotland -voted to remain.
No. Countries didn’t vote. People voted. We all had exactly one vote each.
Ignoring that fact, especially in the case of the former, may well have serious consequences.
I have a contact in the Corymeela Community - the Irish equivalent of the Iona community - a group dedicated to reconciliation and peaceful co-existance. They were background hosts to much of the groundwork which led to the Good Friday agreement.
They try to keep in contact with both sides of the sectarian divide, and I'm told that several republican elements outwith the control of Sinn Fein have gone very quiet since February.
When these particular elements 'go quiet' that means they stop attending reconciliation meetings and sever contacts with neutral liasons.
If Northern Ireland is pulled out of the EU against her will, you can bet whinging will be the least of her problems.
The situation as it exists at present is not perfect by any means, but it has, by and large, worked.
Change it and the balance will shift; other republican elements, at the moment content to lie low, will not wish to be seen as doing nothing while the 'extreme extremists' act.
Is this a price worth paying?
So instead of trying to use Brexit as a wedge to break up the UK why not fight to stop it?
-
I liked this from elsewhere: "Boris became PM with 92k votes. Boaty McBoatface got 124k and was overruled for being a bloody stupid idea...."
Ok let’s compromise. From now on Boris is to be called Twatty McTwatface. Seems fair.
-
I'd suggest that Scotland is being ignored more than London: because Scotland has the right to choose between being part of the UK outside the EU and being an independent
EU member, whereas London presumably doesn't have that choice.
-
Lots of people are being ignored. People are screaming that Brexit is a terrible idea from all parts of the UK, not just Scotland. About one voter in three in Scotland voted for Brexit. When you say Scotland wants to stay in the EU, you whitewash a third of your voters out of existence.
Please stop making Brexit a petty Scottish independence issue.
If the integrity of the UK is more important than UK membership of or independence from the EU, then perhaps the decision to trigger article 50 should have only been taken with the agreement of all four UK countries.
-
If the integrity of the UK is more important than UK membership of or independence from the EU, then perhaps the decision to trigger article 50 should have only been taken with the agreement of all four UK countries.
Well, yes, but it isn't more important to the True Believers. A poll of Conservative party members (https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye) tells us that a majority would accept the break up of the UK, significant economic damage, and even the destruction of their own party in order for Brexit to happen.
Brexit seems to have become like a bizarre religious cult amongst a significant minority, something that must happen at all costs, because.... well.... because it just must! It's the "Will of the People" (except it almost certainly isn't (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/final-say-remain-leave-second-referendum-brexit-no-deal-crossover-day-a8541576.html) anymore)...
-
My sister sent me an amusing picture of Boris and Trump with long girly hair, holding hands, dressed in pretty dresses, wearing knee length white socks and children's shoes, very pretty! It made me giggle. ;D
-
Well, yes, but it isn't more important to the True Believers. A poll of Conservative party members (https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye) tells us that a majority would accept the break up of the UK, significant economic damage, and even the destruction of their own party in order for Brexit to happen.
Hello again :)
They are apostate conservatives in fact, as they are supposed to also be unionists.
-
I'd suggest that Scotland is being ignored more than London: because Scotland has the right to choose between being part of the UK outside the EU and being an independent EU member
No it doesn't. The UK parliament would have to pass a law to make Scotland independent.
whereas London presumably doesn't have that choice.
True, but, again, if the UK Parliament passed a law, it could be independent.
-
If the integrity of the UK is more important than UK membership of or independence from the EU, then perhaps the decision to trigger article 50 should have only been taken with the agreement of all four UK countries.
I wish.
It would have been a somewhat artificial condition but it would have stopped Brexit.
-
The new leader of the House of Commons wants to go back to the 60's
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49137619
He's not fit for purpose (to use a phrase he has banned).
-
I think Mr Rees-Mogg has every right to enforce good grammar. Our use of the English language has become slack over recent decades.
-
The purpose of language is communication. English is an unusual language in that it is a fusion of two dissimilar ancient languages and that it is possible to communicate in structures that originate from either of these languages.
One source of English is the old German imported by the Angles, Saxons and Danes. This is characterised by meaning being transmitted by using short particles, The other source is Norman French which, originating from Latinate sources, is inflective and multisyllabic. There was a social divide between the language users - the serfs and common people using old German and the aristocracy using Norman French. One consequence of this is displayed by food names - beef, mutton and pork - eaten by the aristocrats, but the animals - oxen, sheep and pigs - were raised by the serfs.
There is a belief - largely held by people who are out of touch from reality or who are driven to demonstrate their intellectual superiority of others - that the more complex language they use the higher their status. I suspect that Mr Rees-Mogg subscribes to this view. He is more likely to say meretricious sesquipedalianism than bullshit baffles brains.
Which, Mr Spud, do you find easier to understand?
-
I hesitate to reply to your statement, Mr Hall; or if you prefer: er...
-
I think Mr Rees-Mogg has every right to enforce good grammar. Our use of the English language has become slack over recent decades.
Rees-Mogg is an unpleasant ultra-right wing creep, language changes over time, SO WHAT? There are much more important things for the Government to concentrate on at present, like the unholy mess this country will be in if there is a no deal Brexit. >:(
-
I think Mr Rees-Mogg has every right to enforce good grammar. Our use of the English language has become slack over recent decades.
That isn't what he's doing. The article quotes a professor of linguistics as saying: Mr Rees-Mogg's style guide does not necessarily relate to grammatical rules or other language rules, but seems more aimed "at preserving his antique vibe".
As for the use of imperial units... I'm actually lost for words.
Rees-Mogg seems more like a needy teenager trying to bolster his image than a serious politician. This is a government of fools, ideologues, and incompetents, brought to power by an extremist 0.2% of the electorate; this country is totally fucked unless we can get rid of them...
-
Hear hear
-
I've listened to one or two of his shows on LBC. Even if he is wrong about Brexit etc, he is a friendly person and that is the one thing I look for in anyone.
-
I think Mr Rees-Mogg has every right to enforce good grammar. Our use of the English language has become slack over recent decades.
Who said anything about grammar?
Non titles males are "esquire" - really? what century are we in? What about non titled females, don't they get something to put after their names?
Double spaces after a fullstops. That's an anachronism from the typewriter age.
No comma after "and" - nobody has ever put a comma after "and". What was he on?
Imperial measurements - let's go back to Merrie England when a pound was a point and everybody poor died of TB.
-
I hesitate to reply to your statement, Mr Hall; or if you prefer: er...
Mr Hall Esquire to you.
-
Who said anything about grammar?
Non titles males are "esquire" - really? what century are we in? What about non titled females, don't they get something to put after their names?
Double spaces after a fullstops. That's an anachronism from the typewriter age.
No comma after "and" - nobody has ever put a comma after "and". What was he on?
Imperial measurements - let's go back to Merrie England when a pound was a point and everybody poor died of TB.
A comma after 'and' is quite a common mistake. I (somehow) went to a grammar school, and having been thoroughly drilled in the importance of correct English, I find it distressing when people can't make the effort to learn the same. For example, one lady I sometimes work with announces over the PA, "please may you finalize your purchases and make your way to the checkout, as this store is now closed"!
-
A comma after 'and' is quite a common mistake.
No it isn't.
I (somehow) went to a grammar school, and having been thoroughly drilled in the importance of correct English, I find it distressing when people can't make the effort to learn the same. For example, one lady I sometimes work with announces over the PA, "please may you finalize your purchases and make your way to the checkout"!
But most of Rees-Mogg's rules have nothing to do with grammar and more to do with evoking a bygone age when gentlemen were men, everybody else were oiks and women knew their place.
-
No it isn't.
But most of Rees-Mogg's rules have nothing to do with grammar and more to do with evoking a bygone age when gentlemen were men, everybody else were oiks and women knew their place.
I would soon put him in his place, that is for sure. >:(
-
No it isn't.
But most of Rees-Mogg's rules have nothing to do with grammar and more to do with evoking a bygone age when gentlemen were men, everybody else were oiks and women knew their place.
A comma after "and" is not necessarily a mistake - and, what's more, Ree-Smug should know that.
-
Quite, StevenH.
Also, Jeremy, if you use 'Esquire' (Esq), you don't put 'Mr'. He would either be Mr Harrowby Hall or Harrowby Hall, Esq.
-
I'd suggest that Scotland is being ignored more than London: because Scotland has the right to choose between being part of the UK outside the EU and being an independent
EU member, whereas London presumably doesn't have that choice.
Surely that means that London (or rather Londoners) is being ignored more than Scotland (or the people in Scotland) given that they aren't likely to be offered that choice.
-
I'm thinking of both.
Both countries - Northern Ireland and Scotland -voted to remain.
So did London ... and St Albans.
Why are you only concerned with the views of 'countries' not the views of people. Why are the views of the people of London or St Albans less relevant than the view of people in Scotland or Northern Ireland.
-
Mr Hall Esquire to you.
:D No, no, no, that's all wrong - it should be A B Hall, Esq. That is initials plus surname, comma,
But even when I was at Secretarial College back in 1954 the dapper and excellent English teacher told us that Esq. was obsolete! His always well reasoned statements about how and why a person should be addressed in a letter and the format of a letter should be such and such I took with me to the various jobs I had.
-
Quite, StevenH.
Also, Jeremy, if you use 'Esquire' (Esq), you don't put 'Mr'. He would either be Mr Harrowby Hall or Harrowby Hall, Esq.
Indeed. Esq. strictly speaking belongs to men with the legal status of gentleman, one step up from oiks, peasants and riff-raff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squire#Village_leader
-
American 'lawyers' use 'Esquire', I think that applies to both women and men.
-
Quite, StevenH.
Also, Jeremy, if you use 'Esquire' (Esq), you don't put 'Mr'. He would either be Mr Harrowby Hall or Harrowby Hall, Esq.
:D No, no, no, that's all wrong - it should be A B Hall, Esq. That is initials plus surname, comma,
But even when I was at Secretarial College back in 1954 the dapper and excellent English teacher told us that Esq. was obsolete! His always well reasoned statements about how and why a person should be addressed in a letter and the format of a letter should be such and such I took with me to the various jobs I had.
I've been told off by two women now. Didn't Rees Smeg have any rules about women not gainsaying men like back in the good old days when you could have them flogged for not ironing your shirts properly and children were to be seen in the mills and mines and not heard?
-
Relating to your views on Brexit from the Searching for God thread -
I can remember before we joined the EU (then known as the Common Market) when we had good trade relations worldwide, particularly with the counties in the British Commonwealth. We lost all this when we joined, because of the exhorbitant tarrifs imposed by the EU for dealings outside Europe. We also lost most of our fishing rights from the 50 mile coastal zone.
There is a whole world outside Europe The EU is just a dreadful self centred cartel which restricts free trade in order to give unearned profit to its central body in Brussels. When it finally collapses it will be better for all.
-
I can remember before we joined the EU (then known as the Common Market) when we had good trade relations worldwide, particularly with the counties in the British Commonwealth. We lost all this when we joined, because of the exhorbitant tarrifs imposed by the EU for dealings outside Europe.
There is a whole world outside Europe The EU is just a dreadful self centred cartel which restricts free trade in order to give unearned profit to its central body in Brussels. When it finally collapses it will be better for all.
The notion of us prioritising trade with countries on the other side of the world, with rather few people and therefore small markets, over the biggest markets in the world right on our doorstep was always bonkers. And it still is.
You aren't going to recreate the value and ease of trade with France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands etc by trading with Australia and New Zealand however much your backward looking 1950s rose tinted specs might wish you to think.
And those countries know that too - Australia is much more interested in developing trade links with Japan, China, Singapore etc than with the UK.
-
The notion of us prioritising trade with countries on the other side of the world, with rather few people and therefore small markets, over the biggest markets in the world right on our doorstep was always bonkers. And it still is.
You aren't going to recreate the value and ease of trade with France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands etc by trading with Australia and New Zealand however much your backward looking 1950s rose tinted specs might wish you to think.
And those countries know that too - Australia is much more interested in developing trade links with Japan, China, Singapore etc than with the UK.
and that's not to mention the sheer idiocy of choosing to buy your produce from the other side of the planet rather than from our nearest neighbours when we need to reduce food miles and carbon emissions.
-
and that's not to mention the sheer idiocy of choosing to buy your produce from the other side of the planet rather than from our nearest neighbours when we need to reduce food miles and carbon emissions.
Indeed, I was in Sainsbury's on Wednesday trying to buy satsumas (or equivalent). They were all from Peru. Peru for goodness sake! Spain's just down the fucking road.
Didn't buy any.
-
Indeed, I was in Sainsbury's on Wednesday trying to buy satsumas (or equivalent). They were all from Peru. Peru for goodness sake! Spain's just down the fucking road.
Didn't buy any.
Maybe Spanish satsumas aren't in season at the moment.
-
Maybe Spanish satsumas aren't in season at the moment.
I've never noticed the lack of Spanish fruit in equivalent seasons in the past.
-
Relating to your views on Brexit from the Searching for God thread -
I can remember before we joined the EU (then known as the Common Market) when we had good trade relations worldwide, particularly with the counties in the British Commonwealth. We lost all this when we joined, because of the exhorbitant tarrifs imposed by the EU for dealings outside Europe. We also lost most of our fishing rights from the 50 mile coastal zone.
There is a whole world outside Europe The EU is just a dreadful self centred cartel which restricts free trade in order to give unearned profit to its central body in Brussels. When it finally collapses it will be better for all.
The so called 'British Commonwealth' was a DISGRACE, when you think of the way it was acquired. >:( Little Britain is too small to stand alone these days, we need the EU as much as they need us, it is far better to trade with our near neighbours than those further afield. If it collapses Britain will be much worse off, imo.
-
Relating to your views on Brexit from the Searching for God thread -
I can remember before we joined the EU (then known as the Common Market) when we had good trade relations worldwide, particularly with the counties in the British Commonwealth. We lost all this when we joined, because of the exhorbitant tarrifs imposed by the EU for dealings outside Europe.
Can you cite some specific examples of countries we used to have lots of trade with but now do not due to being in the EU?
We also lost most of our fishing rights from the 50 mile coastal zone.
What you mean is we lost the right to stop fishermen from other EU countries from fishing in our waters but you are ignoring the fact that our fisherman can now fish in other EU waters.
There is a whole world outside Europe.
But the EU is the largest single trading bloc in the World. We'd be stupid to leave it.
The EU is just a dreadful self centred cartel which restricts free trade in order to give unearned profit to its central body in Brussels. When it finally collapses it will be better for all.
But we are members of the cartel. The people in Brussels are from all EU nations, one of them the UK. We are not victims ofd the EU, we are the EU.
-
I've never noticed the lack of Spanish fruit in equivalent seasons in the past.
You must have imagined the Peruvian satsumas: Alan Burns tells us it is impossible to trade with non EU countries because of EU tariffs.
-
I can remember before we joined the EU (then known as the Common Market) when we had good trade relations worldwide, particularly with the counties in the British Commonwealth.
We also had a manufacturing industry, and a solid lead technologically on most of the places we traded with, as well as historic limitations on their capacity to trade in other places. That was more than my entire lifetime ago, it's a different world now.
We lost all this when we joined, because of the exhorbitant tarrifs imposed by the EU for dealings outside Europe.
The tarriffs didn't change significantly, what changed was that we were no longer paying those tarriffs to trade with other places in Europe. Stuff from outside didn't get considerably more expensive, stuff from inside Europe got considerably cheaper. That's one of the key problems with leaving with no deal - we won't have a deal with anywhere else, either, so suddenly we'll be paying those tarriffs whereever we choose to trade with.
We also lost most of our fishing rights from the 50 mile coastal zone.
We negotiated those fishing right agreements outside of the European Community in the late 1960's - entering the EU meant that the EC countries could negotiate as a block with the likes of Norway and Iceland, and actually secure a marginally better deal. If we drop out without a deal, we'll revert to the prior agreement which will see us lose access, overall.
There is a whole world outside Europe The EU is just a dreadful self centred cartel which restricts free trade in order to give unearned profit to its central body in Brussels. When it finally collapses it will be better for all.
There is a world outside Europe - in general it is either significantly poorer and further away, or significantly richer and even further away, neither of which puts us in a strong position to get good trade links out of it.
The EU is no more nor less self-centred than, say, the US, China or any of the emerging economies - we are part (for the moment) of that EU self-interest, and we benefit from it.
O.