Forum menu
polls since BXP stand down announcement show a 1-3% rise for the Tories since then, Labur were making headway before that
Maybe but as I've said lots of times the electorate can't vote any more for the Tories in the consitutencies that the BXP have stood down in than they can in 2017.
However what this underlies is the philosophy of spending for the sake of spending because it is somehow viewed as “good”
No-one wants to spend money and not get anything for it. That's a ludicrous assertion, not even politicians are that stupid. There is a caveat though - if you spend money on something that no-one needs, but you spend money within your own economy, then the money doesn't disappear, it's redistributed amongst the population where hopefully it'll get spent again within the economy. See Apollo Moon landings. But this requires care, otherwise it'll end up off-shore in someone else's pockets who doesn't need it.
If we had a net positive then sure… spend, create jobs and distribute but when the trade deficit is negative for any length of time borrowing is not an answer.
You borrow to invest and make more money. Ask any business owner.
Rafael behr usually gets my attention and writes this on a lab/LD pact:
As for the notion that Labour and Lib Dems should come to a grand accommodation, it is as old as it is infertile. They are old rivals from different traditions with grudges at every level from the Commons chamber to council by-election.
Even if individuals in certain seats could set bygones aside, at national level Jo Swinson needs support from liberal Tories who abhor Corbynism every bit as much as Brexit nationalism. Swinson cannot afford to give the faintest hint of formal collaboration with Labour under its current leader. Besides, there would be scant reciprocation. When Labour activists call for an alliance, what they tend to mean is that the Lib Dems should admit the folly of their existence, shut up and dock with the big red mothership of all political virtue. It is not as persuasive a pitch as some on the left seem to think
When Labour activists call for an alliance, what they tend to mean is that the Lib Dems should admit the folly of their existence, shut up and dock with the big red mothership of all political virtue.
^^^ this
I want LibDems and Labour to stand aside in a handful of obvious seats to try and deny Johnson his majority. Expecting the national LibDem Party to do so without any reciprocation from Labour is naive… but I still want them to, we still need them to… worry about what do to about an inwards looking Labour Party after denying Johnson his majority.
To discuss the NHS squandering £Billions and not mentioning PFI is disingenuous
A Tory idea seized by Blair/Brown to keep huge amounts of lending effectively off the books
And saddled pretty much every Trust with massive unsustainable costs for 30 years or so
I don’t think either Red or Blue can look back on that with pride. Which is probably why neither side mentions it
No-one wants to spend money and not get anything for it. That’s a ludicrous assertion, not even politicians are that stupid. There is a caveat though – if you spend money on something that no-one needs, but you spend money within your own economy, then the money doesn’t disappear, it’s redistributed amongst the population where hopefully it’ll get spent again within the economy. See Apollo Moon landings. But this requires care, otherwise it’ll end up off-shore in someone else’s pockets who doesn’t need it.
You borrow to invest and make more money. Ask any business owner.
Apollo was done at a time the US had a staggeringly huge positive trade.
You borrow, invest, MAKE MONEY, PAY INTEREST and PAY BACK.... the only way we can pay back is if we have +ve money coming in. The last time that happened in a month was 1989....
After a quarter or even a year as the interest mounts and you borrow more just to pay interest at some point it should have been obvious that borrowing our way out of debt wasn't working, let alone a decade.
To discuss the NHS squandering £Billions and not mentioning PFI is disingenuous
A Tory idea seized by Blair/Brown to keep huge amounts of lending effectively off the books
And saddled pretty much every Trust with massive unsustainable costs for 30 years or so
I don’t think either Red or Blue can look back on that with pride. Which is probably why neither side mentions it
I'm not trying to be dis-ingenious.... I simply expect that from the Tory's....
Lib Dem candidate has stood down in Canterbury
I will be interested to see if any Labour candidates make similar personal decisions to step down in marginals.
Edit should have said: Be interesting to see if any other candidates make similar decisions - seems a reasonable way to move forward without the national parties losing any face.
Of course they could do a deal. Labour and tories did in Scotland against the snp
In the latest instalment of this election campaign that is increasingly looking like its on acid...Jeremy Corbyn heckled as 'terrorist sympathiser' by Church of Scotland minister outside Glasgow campaign rally
In the latest instalment of this election campaign that is increasingly looking like its on acid…
People have been pulling up his tweets. Comes across as a lovely man of the cloth.
Somewhat surprising he is C of S and not one of the more nutty churches.
People have been pulling up his tweets.
Indeed. Being heckled by an overt racist and homophobe is no bad thing.
https://twitter.com/RaynerSkyNews/status/1194616866297266176?s=20
https://twitter.com/RaynerSkyNews/status/1194617302362263552?s=20
Still, JC showing off his knowledge of Scotland by wearing a tartan scarf. Are his own staff trolling him now?
dazh
Subscriber
Libdems are shooting themselves in the foot with this Canterbury thing. I get the whole thing about them needing to be anti-labour to pick up tory seats, but this betrays their true intentions. They’re more interested in beating labout than they are the tories.
Same as with the Unite for Remain pact, it's just that this is even more blatant. It's more and more unavodable that their only goal is to be 4th in a Tory-led country but with a few more seats. I don't just mean "only thing they're working on", I mean literally the only thing they can imagine as a goal for their party.
Scarfy McScarface?
I mean literally the only thing they can imagine as a goal for their party.
Strange isn't it that Swinson says she thinks she can be PM, yet her actions say that she thinks the best she can hope for is a few more MPs and the possiblity of Johnson or Corbyn begging her for help. Of course there is always the possiblity that Swinson is as deluded in real life as she appears in public. From what I've seen of her I wouldn't be too surprised.
Of course there is always the possiblity that Swinson is as deluded in real life as she appears in public. From what I’ve seen of her I wouldn’t be too surprised.
Judging by the number of personal attacks, it's not just Swinson who thinks the Libdems are going to do *very* well in this election. 😀
and the possiblity of Johnson or Corbyn begging her for help.
But that outcome is surely the most likely? The chances of anyone having an overall majority isn't a high one, is it?
And I doubt the Lib Dems will be mugged again like they were by Dave. Especially having just watched the DUP show them how its done. There's the opportunity here to wield a totally disproportionate amount of influence for the amount of seats they'll get. And I certainly hope they use it to make Brexit less Brexity
Hardly deluded, is it?
She's not deluded. She's just unscrupulous and innately dishonest. Unlike Johnson she knows the difference between truth and lies, she just doesn't think it applies to her (Johnson I think really doesn't know that they're not the same thing)
(OOB might consider that a personal attack but it's just a statement of facts. She's got 0 chance of being PM, and she knows it. Unite For Remain is a whitewash made mostly out of misdirection which is more likely to help the Tories than to hinder them, and she knows that too. She's a much more competent liar than Johnson but that's not better.)
She’s just unscrupulous and innately dishonest.
OOB might consider that a personal attack
You think? 😀
Yep, that's why I put the rebuttal in before you even responded.
Or do you think she has a greater than 0% chance of being PM? Do you think that Unite For Remain is a totally legit and well intentioned movement? Do you even think she's the leader of the biggest remain party?
We shouldn't be worried about calling liars what they are, that's just a way for honest people to enable the liars and further devalue the truth.
The really troublesome thing about Swinson's lib dems, is that the key lies aren't even productive lies. Unite For Remain's a joke which could have achieved a lot but instead has as its single most likely outcome one more hard leaver MP. Insisting she can be PM undermines everything else she says since literally nobody believes it, but she's so committed to that lie that she can't even take advantage of the opportunities provided by "I will not be PM but we can still achieve a lot" which is where all of her strength really is. She's limited her own useful options with her own needless, transparent, ineffectual lies.
I'm never a fan of political lies but at least sometimes they're a means to an end and that's understandable if not laudable.
@scotroutes wrote:
Still, JC showing off his knowledge of Scotland by wearing a tartan scarf. Are his own staff trolling him now?
It a scarf from children's charity https://www.whocaresscotland.org/
I really don't get all the vitriol aimed at Jo Swinson. She just comes across like a particularly annoying primary school teacher
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/NFb0LH8x/EJQhs6y-XUAE0-X88-jpeg.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/NFb0LH8x/EJQhs6y-XUAE0-X88-jpeg.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://postimages.org/ ]imagehost[/url]
Not looking to defend Pastor Richard, but what about the above isn't true.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an Islamic absolute monarchy in which Sunni Islam is the official state religion based on firm Sharia law. No law requires all citizens to be Muslim, but non-Muslims must practice their religion in private and are vulnerable to discrimination and deportation.[1] Children born to Muslim fathers are by law deemed Muslim, and conversion from Islam to another religion is considered apostasy and punishable by death.[
Not too late to edit taxi
All of it is untrue ffs.
Is Saudi Arabia the only Muslim country?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
Not looking to defend Pastor Richard, but what about the above isn’t true.
Loads.
Talking about 'all Muslims' as if they are the same isn't very clever. I'm not sure you know the first thing about what it is to be Muslim in the modern world.
Even in majority Muslim countries, things vary a lot. I went to Turkey during Ramadan. The staff canteen was a bit less crowded than usual, according to the Turkish people I was eating lunch with (during Ramadan).
That kind of statement comes from ignorance, I'm afraid.
All of it is untrue ffs.
Is Saudi Arabia the only Muslim country?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
It's not untrue it's partially true.... it's misleading because it is giving an impression perhaps it means ALL ...
Saudi is by far not the only Islamic country that punishes conversion by death.
My ex certainly got disowned for being an atheist... (though she ended up becoming a Jehovas Witness ???)
Not too late to edit taxi
All of it is untrue ffs.
Ok if not completely true in every case, lets call it true in many cases.
Telling me to edit because you disagree with me, isn't that remarkable arrogance ?
Do British Muslims disown their kids if they become Christian?
In many many cases yes.
As do many Christian families and Churches (such as the JW and the Plymouth Brethren for instance)
She just comes across like a particularly annoying primary school teacher
But she’s the real enemy Binners… catch up. Only a few more weeks left to defeat the LibDems, which must be the goal for all of us, even though it’s handing Johnson seats that he needs… it’s far more important to keep the LibDem seat count down so that we can not be challenged in our role as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition. Only a few more weeks before Labour can return to the opposition front bench, pure and unsullied by cooperating with yellow Tories and dangerous Scottish separatists. And let’s not even mention those cynical Greens.
Anyone, I really like Corbyn’s scarf… where can I get one the same. The heckler was a grade A plonker.
As do many Christian families and Churches (such as the JW and the Plymouth Brethren for instance)
Indeed they might, people disown their children for all manner of reasons, but across the breadth of Christianity you're far less likely to be disowned for renouncing your faith than in Islam. I'm not going argue about that it's just a fact.
Only a few more weeks left to defeat the LibDems, which must be the goal for all of us
I love the level of projection going on here.
Swinson has made it clear that she does want to be in a position where she can demand that Labour jump to her wishes which include removing of those who dont suit her ideological aims.
For some odd reason Labour supporters arent overly keen on having someone with rather right wing tendencies dictating to them who they should have as their leader.
Hopefully at some stage the Libdems will tell the orange book brigade to piss off so they can return to being a semi reasonable choice.
I’m not going argue about that it’s just a fact.
Quality line of argument there.
However you seem to be admitting that Richards is talking shit?
To flip it on its head. Do you think it would be fair to say all C of S preachers are complete arseholes? If not why not?
it’s far more important to keep the LibDem seat count down so that we can not be challenged in our role as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition
Kelvin I think you're mistaking us Swinson haters on here for the labour leadership. If you watch the labour campaign, they make almost no mention of the liberal democrats, and are focusing all their attention on the tories, so you have nothing to fear.
Back to the campaign, I was watching the live focus group on the Victoria Derbyshire show this morning, and I was pretty amazed at just how much people have fallen for the anti-Corbyn propaganda. They were mostly positive about labour policies, but when they were asked to describe Johnson and Corbyn as animals, Johnson was described as an Eagle, Lion or Bear, whilst Corbyn a rat, snake and chicken! Now I may be biased but to even the cursory observer out of the two, the untrustworthy and dishonest one is clearly Johnson. Or maybe it's not the propaganda and just deeply ingrained class deference?
If you watch the labour campaign, they make almost no mention of the liberal democrats
Oh, you are funny.
I follow most of the front bench on twitter, and they bang on about them all the time.
Anyway, I was talking about standing aside in key Tory vs LibDem battle grounds. That’s not going to happen. And it needs to for Johnson to be denied those seats.
pretty amazed
How can you be amazed. We had a thread or two on here where we’ve been telling you for years that people who would otherwise vote Labour will not do so while Corbyn is leader as he has no appeal beyond his core support. People do not like Corbyn. You can bang on about why that shouldn’t be the case, but it’s been obvious for at least 18 months. He is a turn off for voters. It’s as plain as day.
“I like our local Labour councillors, they talk a lot of sense and do good work, and lots of Labour policies will benefit me and my family directly, but I just can not vote for that man to become PM.”
I hear that again and again locally, and I try damn hard to convince people of the benefits of replacing our Tory MP with a Labour MP, and people agree, but then say they still can’t vote Labour because of Corbyn. The man is an albatross around the Labour Party’s neck, and the only real asset Johnson’s has in this campaign.
I’m not going argue about that it’s just a fact.
Is that one of those facts you can prove, or just one of those other sort of "facts" where you can't actually prove it, but just "know" it's true?
People do not like Corbyn.
I've never claimed they don't. What I'm talking about is why. It's as clear as day if you take even the most brief interest in it that Corbyn is a decent honest bloke, whilst Johnson is a dishonest, untrustworthy narcissist. Yet people say they prefer Johnson to Corbyn. It's weird, and like I said perhaps ingrained class deference has something to do with it, or they just don't want to be ruled by someone who is like them?
Who cares why. What do you do about it? Far too late to do the obvious and replace him. You can’t sideline him in the campaign. You can’t turn it into some joint leader/deputy campign, because Watson is doing a runner. What do you do? Keep smiling and press on ‘till the election is out of the way.
ruled by someone who is like them?
When did you last speak to someone who thinks Corbyn is “like them”!? People see him as someone who has made a living out of politics, has never done a days hard work, sleeps around with other politicians, a middle class layabout who dresses like a comedy poor man, someone jumps to the defence of Russia & Iran when no one else does… they see him as alien.
What do you do about it?
What they did last time, and what they're doing now. Cut through the lies by getting him in front of as many people as possible either in person or in the media so they can start to see with their own eyes that what they've been told and what they think of him is untrue. It doesn't really matter who the leader is, they'd get the same treatment from the media. Look at Miliband, and Brown before him. They only ever supported Blair because he was a tory 😉
You can’t turn it into some joint leader/deputy campign
But they have done that. There's a reason Rayner is playing a very prominent role in this campaign, along side McDonnell.
In many many cases yes.
There are many cases of people, including Christians and atheists being complete dicks. But I don't go around saying 'atheists are dicks' or 'Christians are dicks'. The reason your comments are racist is that you are taking an example of dickish behaviour and reasoning that, because the people happen to be Muslim, that they are behaving badly specifically because they are Muslims - therefore insinuating that Muslims are bad people. This is a terrible road to go down, it really is.
When did you last speak to someone who thinks Corbyn is “like them”!?
I reckon I'm quite like him. Rational, thoughtful, reasonable, not that good at politics and people miss his points a lot.
Dazh… the Rayner stuff is playing well… it has to be said. Repeating 2017 will be an uphill struggle though… people won’t suddenly ignore two years of Corbyn turning them away/off… we’re not in the same situation as 2017… Johnson is the new radical leader now, not Corbyn, as maddeningly messed up as that is.
My colleague went to a wedding with both christian & islamic ceremonies a few weeks ago !!!
im not sure that anyone got dis-owned by their families, she said it was a great weekend
the minister just sounds like a bigoted dick to me, surprised anyone would agree with him
The only inter-faith marriage I know of that caused family disownment involved a Sikh woman. Not sure what this has to do with this thread. I know lots of Muslims married to non-Muslims… never heard of any issues.
[Everyone in these pointless anecdotes is voting Labour - I even had a heated drunken debate with my Sikh friend’s husband at another wedding, where he was trying to get me to vote Labour when Miliband was leader, despite the mugs and Edstone nonsense trying to use immigration as a campaign tool … he was right, I should have.]
So… where can I buy that scarf?