politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Northern Ireland Assembly Election Result : March 2nd 2017

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Northern Ireland Assembly Election Result : March 2nd 2017

Changes in seats are based on readjusted Assembly calculations

Read the full story here

Ishmael_Z

1

surbiton

Unionism has seen what's coming.

Sean_F

Claire Sugden should be added to the Unionists. And PBP and Cross Community Labour don't designate themselves as Nationalist.

TheScreamingEagles

BETTING RELATED POST

https://twitter.com/pierrebri/status/838097059311939584
https://twitter.com/pierrebri/status/838097366473375745

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/jgault13/status/838103608197529601

FrancisUrquhart

I saw on sky news macron campaign claiming Russian hacking / smearing campaign.

TheScreamingEagles

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The_Apocalypse

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

Mortimer

The_Apocalypse said:

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

The women's march doesn't swing votes in the rust belt, suprisingly..

HarryHayfield

Sean_F said:

Claire Sugden should be added to the Unionists. And PBP and Cross Community Labour don't designate themselves as Nationalist.

Thank you for that clarification, I wasn't entirely sure so erred on the side of caution.. That's Unionists 40, Nationalists 39, Others 11

Morris_Dancer

Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

The_Apocalypse

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

The women's march doesn't swing votes in the rust belt, suprisingly..

Well, I didn't say that it did. It was in response to your statement that 'opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.' In America abortion is definitely a Conservative issue.

Mortimer

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

HarryHayfield

TheScreamingEagles said:

BETTING RELATED POST

https://twitter.com/pierrebri/status/838097059311939584
https://twitter.com/pierrebri/status/838097366473375745

France 24 is reporting that at Fillon's campaign launch today he gave no indication of any statement tomorrow at all.

Mortimer

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

The women's march doesn't swing votes in the rust belt, suprisingly..

Well, I didn't say that it did. It was in response to your statement that 'opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.' In America abortion is definitely a Conservative issue.

If you don't think that the women's march muffles real opposition, you can't see the wood for the trees.

Mortimer

Thanks as ever Harry!

TheScreamingEagles

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Great leaders earn loyalty.

Blind loyalty is the what leads to Corbynism or Gordon Brown's coronation.

Mortimer

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Great leaders earn loyalty.

Blind loyalty is the what leads to Corbynism or Gordon Brown's coronation.

Double digit poll leads in Government not enough? You're a tough cookie!

The_Apocalypse

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

The women's march doesn't swing votes in the rust belt, suprisingly..

Well, I didn't say that it did. It was in response to your statement that 'opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.' In America abortion is definitely a Conservative issue.

If you don't think that the women's march muffles real opposition, you can't see the wood for the trees.

You're going to have elaborate on that statement instead of dismissively saying 'you can't see the wood for the trees.' The Democrats and any other pro-abortion rights groups are going to have to rely on protest etc because the GOP have the WH and Congress.

Sean_F

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Great leaders earn loyalty.

Blind loyalty is the what leads to Corbynism or Gordon Brown's coronation.

So far, I think she's made a good start.

Pulpstar

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

Yorkcity

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Can not see May agreeing to any referendum on Northern Irelands future.

Mortimer

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

FPT

Mortimer said:

Yes - the haters. Some are opposed to his policies, others are so enraged that they rail against the bluster and opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.

It isn't exactly difficult to understand. Infrastructure spending, tax cuts and conservative justices are the real aim. Immigration changes are not exactly priority number one for the conservatives

Some? Nearly all of Trump's critics are opposed to his policies in one way or another. It is just that they have additional concerns about his personality, and temperant alongside that. Opposition to Conservative issues is hardly muffled - the Women's March was in part a march against the administration's plans concerning Planned Parenthood and the desire of many Republicans to seen Rode v Wade overturned. Immigration changes may not be the number one priority, but they were certainly up there for the Republican base who have been passionate about this issue even prior to Trump.

Tax cuts can be reserved; they hardly quantify as something which will engineer some massive revolution that Trump's successor will not be able to overturn. Tax reform, conservative justices are all issues Conservatives care about yes. But immigration, and Obamacare are just as important and so far neither of these things are going well.

Infrastructure spending is not really a Conservative issue. Of all the things that the likes of Paul Ryan et al get excited about all of things I've just listed are way more important to them than infrastructure spending.

The women's march doesn't swing votes in the rust belt, suprisingly..

Well, I didn't say that it did. It was in response to your statement that 'opposition to Conservative issues is muffled.' In America abortion is definitely a Conservative issue.

If you don't think that the women's march muffles real opposition, you can't see the wood for the trees.

You're going to have elaborate on that statement instead of dismissively saying 'you can't see the wood for the trees.' The Democrats and any other pro-abortion rights groups are going to have to rely on protest because the GOP have the WH and Congress.

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

SouthamObserver

Yorkcity said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Can not see May agreeing to any referendum on Northern Irelands future.

The Good Friday Agreement outlines the circumstances under which a referendum must be held. May or anyone else could not renege on that, unless the GFA itself was totally scrapped.

calum

Interesting development in corporate Scotland:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/standard-life-and-aberdeen-asset-management-confirm-merger-talks-1-4383336

Mortimer

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

This has shades of Thursday all over again.

midwinter

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

Must not post that picture of Hitler at the Trocadéro.

justin124

Thought we might have an Opinium poll in tomorrow's Observer.

SouthamObserver

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

The prize is too big. If he can get to R2 against Le Pen chances are he becomes president.

Pulpstar

Mortimer said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

This has shades of Thursday all over again.

Yep he'd have announced thursday if he was standing down.

Its reminding me a bit of Trump's campaign actually..

TheWhiteRabbit

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

My book is even more of a mess! Not terrible, just messy. Macron v Juppé is great, Juppé v Le Pen terrible.

Alistair

calum said:

Interesting development in corporate Scotland:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/standard-life-and-aberdeen-asset-management-confirm-merger-talks-1-4383336

Wowzer.

Pulpstar

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

My book is even more of a mess! Not terrible, just messy. Macron v Juppé is great, Juppé v Le Pen terrible.

-411.5 Le Pen
+207.49 Macron
+358.36 Fillon
+17.15 Juppe
+20.59 Other
+375.68 Baroin
+95.64 Melenchon
-152.31 Hamon

Mortimer

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Sunil_Prasannan

Can PBP and the Cross-Community Labour Party be described as "Nationalist"?

Sean_F

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Can PBP and the Cross-Community Labour Party be described as "Nationalist"?

No. Both are agnostic on the Border.

JackW

DavidL said:

There's a brilliant line in Scott about someone "riding up to the castle with all the arrogance of a second cousin". Captures the importance of family in the clan structure.

It can be a problem until one deploys Mrs JackW from the ramparts ....

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Not with Nationalists polling sub-40%....

MikeL

I think the final paragraph should say:

First Preference Wins on proposed constituencies: DUP 8, Sinn Fein 8, Too close to call 1

The total must be 17.

TheWhiteRabbit

Dutch poll:

Peil PVV/WIlders 25 leads VVD/Rutte 24

The election is 11 days.

My forecast at the moment is PVV 24, VVD 22 (we shall see!) - the 2.3 on the VVD winning is fair.

Blue_rog

Been drinking for a while but could I request a thread on the Cheltenham week please? Need to go to bed hic

TheWhiteRabbit

Pulpstar said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

My book is even more of a mess! Not terrible, just messy. Macron v Juppé is great, Juppé v Le Pen terrible.

-411.5 Le Pen
+207.49 Macron
+358.36 Fillon
+17.15 Juppe
+20.59 Other
+375.68 Baroin
+95.64 Melenchon
-152.31 Hamon

Can we swap though my worst mistake was selling Juppé five days ago.

The_Apocalypse

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

Sunil_Prasannan

Sean_F said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Can PBP and the Cross-Community Labour Party be described as "Nationalist"?

No. Both are agnostic on the Border.

Total Nationalist vote 39.70%, seats 39.

Pulpstar

https://twitter.com/Fillon2017_fr/status/838125062100238336

Soutiens Francois !

Mortimer

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

midwinter

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

The_Apocalypse

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

SandyRentool

Looking at the NI constituency list, I get 'Down South', but shouldn't 'Down North' be 'Up North'?

Philip_Thompson

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

Sunil_Prasannan

SandyRentool said:

Looking at the NI constituency list, I get 'Down South', but shouldn't 'Down North' be 'Up North'?

Your plans are Foyled once again, Sandy!

Philip_Thompson

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Sunil_Prasannan

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

And the Left's cosying up to Islamists may reverse progress on women's rights and LGBT equality...

NickPalmer

Pulpstar said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Pulpstar said:

I think Fillon is going to set rocket burners under his campaign tomorrow. Can feel it in my bones.
You wouldn't stand down giving a speech at the Trocadero ffsake.

My book is even more of a mess! Not terrible, just messy. Macron v Juppé is great, Juppé v Le Pen terrible.

-411.5 Le Pen
+207.49 Macron
+358.36 Fillon
+17.15 Juppe
+20.59 Other
+375.68 Baroin
+95.64 Melenchon
-152.31 Hamon

Mine is similar, except Fillon lower and Juppe higher, and that I've scaled down Baroin to 0 - never heard of him, surely he's not a serious contender?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Palmer, a lot of people said that about Corbyn in 2015...

Theuniondivvie

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

The_Apocalypse

Philip_Thompson said:

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

The notion of a state-funded healthcare is a socialist/leftist idea. William Beveridge was a liberal.

I don't see what your point is re Cameron legalising LGBTQ. It was the Left who had been campaigning for LGBTQ rights for years while the Conservatives supported Section 28. It was not Conservatives who turned public opinion around on LGBTQ issues. If anything it was because of the turn around in public opinion that the Conservatives took on the Gay Marriage policy as a means to show that they had 'changed' and were different from how they were in the 1980s. Much of Cameron's social liberalism was in reaction to Tony Blair, and his and Labour's success in shifting the public that way during his time in office.

midwinter

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Sunil_Prasannan

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/david-mundell-slams-indy-blogger-9963256

logical_song

SandyRentool said:

Looking at the NI constituency list, I get 'Down South', but shouldn't 'Down North' be 'Up North'?

FAT LAD
method to remember the six counties.

ThreeQuidder

SandyRentool said:

Looking at the NI constituency list, I get 'Down South', but shouldn't 'Down North' be 'Up North'?

Is it grim Down North?

Mortimer

The_Apocalypse said:

Philip_Thompson said:

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

The notion of a state-funded healthcare is a socialist/leftist idea. William Beveridge was a liberal.

I don't see what your point is re Cameron legalising LGBTQ. It was the Left who had been campaigning for LGBTQ rights for years while the Conservatives supported Section 28. It was not Conservatives who turned public opinion around on LGBTQ issues. If anything it was because of the turn around in public opinion that the Conservatives took on the Gay Marriage policy as a means to show that they had 'changed' and were different from how they were in the 1980s. Much of Cameron's social liberalism was in reaction to Tony Blair, and his and Labour's success in shifting the public that way during his time in office.

I struggle to keep up with the acronyms.

Very cynical re: Cameron, but not re Blair. Strange, that.

ThreeQuidder

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

That's not true, is it? This says 45% against: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/interactive/2013/feb/06/gay-marriage-vote-map-mp#party

Sean_F

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Pulpstar

West Belfast standing on its own there a bit like West Berlin used to !

midwinter

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making which is that it seems that supporters of the right wing of the Tory party appear to expect everyone to rally round a leader in "turbulent times" despite having a history of doing the polar opposite when it suits them.

Sunil_Prasannan

Pulpstar said:

West Belfast standing on its own there a bit like West Berlin used to !

But at council ward level, there is a connection to Lough Neagh...

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/images/maps/map12.htm

Mortimer

midwinter said:

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

The point being Cameroons good, others bad?

William_H

ThreeQuidder said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

That's not true, is it? This says 45% against: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/interactive/2013/feb/06/gay-marriage-vote-map-mp#party

There were a number of abstentions. A majority of those who voted, voted against, 117-127

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/kevcunningham/status/838121598888644608

Mortimer

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/kevcunningham/status/838121598888644608

Not an overwhelming embrace of Norn Iron by the Republic, then....

midwinter

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

The point being Cameroons good, others bad?

Not at all I accept he was on the wrong side of the European argument. The sudden notion of unswerving loyalty to our beloved leader amuses me somewhat however.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/StephenNolan/status/838128294461640708

Theuniondivvie

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/david-mundell-slams-indy-blogger-9963256

Wee Davie Mundell who voted against the repeal of Clause 28 at Holyrood?
There's no hypocrite like one recently emerged from the closet.

Mortimer

midwinter said:

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making which is that it seems that supporters of the right wing of the Tory party appear to expect everyone to rally round a leader in "turbulent times" despite having a history of doing the polar opposite when it suits them.

When what you call 'Turbulent times' is actually insulting much of their own parliamentary and activist party, it is no huge surprise....

Mortimer

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

The point being Cameroons good, others bad?

Not at all I accept he was on the wrong side of the European argument. The sudden notion of unswerving loyalty to our beloved leader amuses me somewhat however.

When my leader is loyal towards the party, I'm loyal towards them.

When they become as good as Lib Dems whilst in office, I tend otherwise...

Sunil_Prasannan

Theuniondivvie said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

Look at it this way. Calm, measured opposition gains ideological traction, fundraising and pan-national support.

Marching on the coast doesn't convince the flyover states of the validity of liberal arguments.

You're a soccer mom in Iowa - say - and voted for Trump despite some reservations. Marching makes the opposition look far too liberal to attract voters next time around.

In your post you said 'real opposition', not 'persuading Rust Belt voters'. Those two things are not necessarily the same for a start.

Secondly, Donald Trump was hardly 'calm, measured' during his campaign or even now - and he still won.

Furthermore, the Women's March was (generally) calm and measured. It was a peaceful protest. Many die-hard Conservatives won't see protest as peaceful and calm because it is a method of opposition that is generally disliked by them. But the Left have employed methods of protest before on issues that they care about - and have won.

Moreover, a 'Conservative' issue is not necessarily an issue which decides elections. It is likely to be issues such as the economy, healthcare, and immigration which will be significant in determining whether Rust Belt voters swing the Democrats way, as opposed to abortion.

The left sneaks the odd victory through non conventional means. Meanwhile the right and centre flourish by convincing voters....

The left's 'non-conventional' means, have actually convinced voters. Today, majority of Britons support the right for a woman to have access to abortion services. A vast majority of Britons support the notion of a state funded healthcare. It is the Left's activism concerning LGBT rights which as been significant turning public opinion around on the issue.

The 'centre' contains politicians that tilt either slightly to the left or to the right - so it is not totally distinct from either the left or the right.

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

Though a majority of his party voted against it, just as it did at Holyrood.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/david-mundell-slams-indy-blogger-9963256

Wee Davie Mundell who voted against the repeal of Clause 28 at Holyrood?
There's no hypocrite like one recently emerged from the closet.

Why are Nationalists like WingsOverScotland so homophobic?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, a Foster-Fillon Sunday Special?

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, a Foster-Fillon Sunday Special?

Gawd I hope not, I need a quiet Sunday.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, that almost guarantees it.

Pulpstar

Arlene Foster's position looks dire to me.

Ishmael_Z

The_Apocalypse said:

Philip_Thompson said:

All parties post war supported the notion of a state funded healthcare. It was a right wing PM who legalised LGBTQ marriage.

The notion of a state-funded healthcare is a socialist/leftist idea. William Beveridge was a liberal.

I don't see what your point is re Cameron legalising LGBTQ. It was the Left who had been campaigning for LGBTQ rights for years while the Conservatives supported Section 28. It was not Conservatives who turned public opinion around on LGBTQ issues. If anything it was because of the turn around in public opinion that the Conservatives took on the Gay Marriage policy as a means to show that they had 'changed' and were different from how they were in the 1980s. Much of Cameron's social liberalism was in reaction to Tony Blair, and his and Labour's success in shifting the public that way during his time in office.

I think you think history started about the time of the Beatles' first LP. What opened the crack in the dam over gay rights was the Wolfenden Report, commissioned by a Churchill government. Everything since is really just footnotes to Wolfenden. And it is not the case that we have an NHS because of a lot of dweebs marching around chanting "What do we want? When do we want it? etc.

midwinter

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Sean_F said:

midwinter said:

Philip_Thompson said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

midwinter said:

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

So Theresa might turn out to be a pound shop modern day David Lloyd George, overseeing the partition of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Might be worth getting behind our leader in turbulent times, no?

Like IDS, Boris, Gove et al?

Tory party didn't have a position on Brexit, remember?

Breaking promises and resigning in a stage managed hissy fit is hardly supporting the Leader who won your party it's first majority in years though is it? Particularly when he's given you a job which evidently far exceeds your capabilities.

Who did that? Boris and Gove never resigned or broke any promises and remained cabinet ministers throughout. IDS did resign but not technically due to Brexit instead in a conflict with Osborne over benefit reforms.

If you think the resignation of IDS was to do with anything other than Brexit I'd suggest you are slightly naive. I also believe I read here that Gove had assured Cameron his support for Leave would be far less enthusiastic than it turned out to be. As for Boris there are multiple quotes from him supporting membership of the EU prior to the referendum.

So yeah not really supporting their leader. Or does that only apply if they're ideologically pure?

Ministers were free to support Brexit. The vote wasn't whipped.

Irrelevant to the point I'm making.

The point being Cameroons good, others bad?

Not at all I accept he was on the wrong side of the European argument. The sudden notion of unswerving loyalty to our beloved leader amuses me somewhat however.

When my leader is loyal towards the party, I'm loyal towards them.

When they become as good as Lib Dems whilst in office, I tend otherwise...

Cameron probably thought that people who based their entire political philosophy on one issue were crazy. Hardly makes him a Lib Dem does it.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/838138169136726018

Morris_Dancer

I'm just reading the introduction to Josephus' The Jewish War, and thought this section worth reciting:
".... of the fanaticism of rival factions and the tensions between them, of the miseries of the ordinary people caught up willy-nilly in events which they could not control ..."

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, that almost guarantees it.

But one of my threads tomorrow has been written and it contains a very subtle 90s pop music reference in the headline.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, is it something like "tell you what I want, I really really want"?

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, is it something like "tell you what I want, I really really want"?

Much more subtler than that.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, is it the lyrics to 2 Unlimited's No Limit?

chestnut

Essential viewing/listening for anyone who thinks 1948 Labour is even vaguely similar to the ramblings associated with Labour these days;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rqyzWzDONQ

GIN1138

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/838138169136726018

WOW! The Donald really does have little... Hands doesn't he?

Sunil_Prasannan

GIN1138 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/838138169136726018

WOW! The Donald really does have little... Hands doesn't he?

YUGE!!!

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, is it the lyrics to 2 Unlimited's No Limit?

No, no, no, no, no, no!

JohnLoony

You seem to have the wrong votes for DUP and SF http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/ni2017/results

Philip_Thompson

midwinter said:

Cameron probably thought that people who based their entire political philosophy on one issue were crazy. Hardly makes him a Lib Dem does it.

Don't ask people what they think of an issue then be surprised when they answer. That's like asking a group of people if they want Chinese or Indian for dinner then getting angry that they said Chinese while you wanted Indian. Don't give a choice if you aren't happy with both outcomes.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/StephenNolan/status/838138274371747840

Morris_Dancer

As an aside, endnotes in books, rather than footnotes, are the work of Satan. Who the hell (excepting Beelzebub) thinks that it's better to have to consult the back of the book rather than have a footnote?

viewcode

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Why are Nationalists like WingsOverScotland so homophobic?

Small sample size, Dr Prasannan. Famously, SinnFein and the ANC eventually had a pro-gay stance.

JohnLoony

DUP margin over SF was only 1,168