So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Sorry but no, the party that forms the government has won the election.
Otherwise using your terminology the SNP lost the last Holyrood election and Merkel has never won one.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Its not an old chestnut. We're in government. And likely to remain so if we can secure 40%+ of the vote.
Juliet Samuel's assessment of your position:
...we have the Wizard of Oz. We are sleepwalking into a hurricane. Every month that goes by, Britain’s situation gets weaker, bringing us closer to a total European capitulation and a Corbyn government.
The Tories seem to think they can wait and then use Mrs May as a Brexit scapegoat. They are putting party before country and the public won’t buy it. If they won’t rip the curtain away now, Brussels will do it for them.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
What is being done to prepare your 2017 electorate for things like this?
"May urged to secure EU trade deal with ‘Norway-style’ payments"
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
What is being done to prepare your 2017 electorate for things like this?
"May urged to secure EU trade deal with ‘Norway-style’ payments"
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
What is being done to prepare your 2017 electorate for things like this?
"May urged to secure EU trade deal with ‘Norway-style’ payments"
I agree that Labour needs a woman leader -indeed, ANY leader other than the appalling Corbyn. No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead between elections. I am glad at last we have an article acknowledging the prematurity of assuming Labour winning next time when Neil Kinnock (and Miliband) had huge leads, yet lost on election day.
However not ANY woman leader,- it must be a woman leader not from Corbyn's hard left faction. A Diane Abbott leadership would be an apocalyptic disaster for Labour. I have grave doubts about Angela Rayner who does not appear prime ministerial -nothing to do with her accent..
In my view Emily Thornberry would be the ideal candidate. She is neither Corbynista nor Blairite, but mainstream (no one has led Labour from the mainstream since John Smith) looks prime ministerial, and would unite the party. If she were Labour leader, I would start voting Labour again-I will not do so as long as Corbyn is around.
But I expect Corbyn will plod on until defeat in 2022.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Some men simply buy a motorbike. Not Henry. He's having the true Carlsbergian kind of mid-life crisis.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Yes, a spectacular dive from grace from the man who, we were told, had an impregnable backstory.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Yes, a spectacular dive from grace from the man who, we were told, had an impregnable backstory.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Yes, a spectacular dive from grace from the man who, we were told, had an impregnable backstory.
Bolton was supposed to be the scandal-free guy, the guy who wouldn’t bring controversy unlike Waters. It’s so ironic how things have turned out.
I agree that Labour will go for a woman to succeed Corbyn - I rate Thornberry highly but harbour a pet theory that women leaders are only elected when then they come from the political right - Thatcher OK, May OK, Clinton not - so disagree with Don`s headline about a subsequent Labour polling breakthrough. My hunch is that the choosing of a female Labour leader will enhance Tory chances at the next election rather than the other way round.
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
This army resourcing story is weird. Feels like Tory party politics. Can anyone decode?
Clearly the British army has rarely been a match for the Russian/Red army. So what's going on?
It sounds like the new Defence Secretary flexing his muscles against the Treasury.
We’ve always had better technology and equipment than the Russians, even if they could outnumber us with boots on the ground. But under Putin the Russkis are investing in R&D more than they have done for three decades, at a time when our own forces are stretched both in terms of men and machines.
What on earth is Henry Bolton trying to achieve? He's lost the dressing room and there's no reason to assume that the rank and file are going to back him.
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
and then seems to have got into a spat with Hodges and ended up retweeting cult tweets:
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Yes, a spectacular dive from grace from the man who, we were told, had an impregnable backstory.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
Theresa May doesn't agree with you – she said she lost the election (by her own definition). The fact that an anonymous Tory cheerleader on a internet forum says she won is immaterial.
Depends on who the female leader is, Don. For example, with the best will in the world, Rebecca Long Bailey or Dianne Abbott will not deliver anything but defeat.
Well the EU need to get working on their bucket of fudge, because we won’t be giving them a £120bn annual deficit in trade in goods without something in services trade the other way.
We’ve always had better technology and equipment than the Russians, even if they could outnumber us with boots on the ground. But under Putin the Russkis are investing in R&D more than they have done for three decades, at a time when our own forces are stretched both in terms of men and machines.
I agree that Labour will go for a woman to succeed Corbyn - I rate Thornberry highly but harbour a pet theory that women leaders are only elected when then they come from the political right - Thatcher OK, May OK, Clinton not - so disagree with Don`s headline about a subsequent Labour polling breakthrough. My hunch is that the choosing of a female Labour leader will enhance Tory chances at the next election rather than the other way round.
Interesting theory! Though NZ seems to have gone the other way.
As Labour leads with women already, and trails in men, particularly with older socially conservatives, there may be a shift in the direction as you say.
Mostly whoever follows Jezza, male or female, will struggle to hold onto his personal vote. People like his authenticity and consistency, and that may not be transferrable.
He is healthy and lives for politics. I cannot see him stepping down before the next GE.
Depends on who the female leader is, Don. For example, with the best will in the world, Rebecca Long Bailey or Dianne Abbott will not deliver anything but defeat.
And going by today's inability to remember the cost of Trident, you can add Nia Griffiths to the list.
If you are going on radio to talk about defence spending as Shadow Defence Secretary, it is not unreasonable to know the costs you are talking about.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Ouch. But if he loses his job he’ll probably go back to the mistress.
What on earth is Henry Bolton trying to achieve? He's lost the dressing room and there's no reason to assume that the rank and file are going to back him.
It's in the great British tradition of the Gallant Last Stand. He's Souter at Gandamak, wrapping himself in the regimental colours, or Durnford at Isandlwana. I could go on.
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
It's very noticeable that the BBC - on the Marr show especially - tends to give right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites a pretty easy ride in interviews. My theory is that this is because its producers, editors and presenters are very conscious of the fact that their own views are diametrically opposed to both varieties and so they overcompensate to avoid accusations of bias. They do this because it is right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites who are quickest to shout bias. And that goes to show that doing it works. So it is not going to stop.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Ouch. But if he loses his job he’ll probably go back to the mistress.
If there is one thing less sexy than a balding mid 50s Ukip leader, it's a a balding mid 50s former Ukip leader.
Instead of re-running the 2017 election (again), can we not just enjoy the UKIP implosion for a few hours?
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
When was the last time someone screwed up their life as quickly as Bolton? He gave up his wife and reputation for his mistress. Then he gave up his mistress to keep his job. Now he will lose his job anyway.
Personally I think the unforgiveable aspect is that Bolton abandoned his wife with two kids under five. And according to newspaper reports she is having to provide for them by herself. What an absolute shit of a man. This kind of behaviour would be unacceptable in any political leader, let alone the leader of a party whose base tends to consist of moralising social conservatives.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
It's very noticeable that the BBC - on the Marr show especially - tends to give right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites a pretty easy ride in interviews. My theory is that this is because its producers, editors and presenters are very conscious of the fact that their own views are diametrically opposed to both varieties and so they overcompensate to avoid accusations of bias. They do this because it is right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites who are quickest to shout bias. And that goes to show that doing it works. So it is not going to stop.
They need to give a hard interview to any politician that crosses their desk, it’s not The One Show, the public expect those who do or wish to rule over us to be held to account.
John McDonnell got let off yesterday and Nigel Farage has been before. The BBC desperately need a younger Andrew Neil to replace him when he retires, and there’s no sign of them having found him (or her) yet.
Perhaps Bolton feels that he was elected by the members and he should be ousted by the members - not a dozen members of the NEC. A quaint view perhaps. Foolhardy perhaps.
The UKIP NEC has been the scourge of Farage, prevented Woolfe (who could have been a very effective leader) from standing, totally undermined Diane James so she quit and was hostile to the reforms Bolton was planning to reduce their powers. They have in no small part played a big role in the effective end of UKIP as a serious national party.
Because of course humans in Britain never had any rights before 2008, when Brown decided to join the EU Convention on HR. And if we dare to leave that convention then humans in Britain will go back to having no rights whatsoever thanks to the evil Tories. < / sarcasm >
I agree that Labour needs a woman leader -indeed, ANY leader other than the appalling Corbyn. No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead between elections. I am glad at last we have an article acknowledging the prematurity of assuming Labour winning next time when Neil Kinnock (and Miliband) had huge leads, yet lost on election day.
However not ANY woman leader,- it must be a woman leader not from Corbyn's hard left faction. A Diane Abbott leadership would be an apocalyptic disaster for Labour. I have grave doubts about Angela Rayner who does not appear prime ministerial -nothing to do with her accent..
In my view Emily Thornberry would be the ideal candidate. She is neither Corbynista nor Blairite, but mainstream (no one has led Labour from the mainstream since John Smith) looks prime ministerial, and would unite the party. If she were Labour leader, I would start voting Labour again-I will not do so as long as Corbyn is around.
But I expect Corbyn will plod on until defeat in 2022.
I agree with you regarding Emily Thornberry.Imo she was impressive in the last GE campaign.Especially against Michael Fallon the conservative attack person.She is competent at PMqs and decent on the media.For the person commentating on here earlier who said she was crap at times seems a bit over the top.
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
Theresa May doesn't agree with you – she said she lost the election (by her own definition). The fact that an anonymous Tory cheerleader on a internet forum says she won is immaterial.
Forming a government is a zero sum game. No-one else won, therefore by default we didn't lose.
It wasn't glorious, and wasn't expected. But it was not a loss.
So, yet again I suggest, the Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
We’re one of the top nations when it comes to LGBTI rights.
I think it gnaws at some that the evil Tories introduced same sex marriage.
(With Lib Dem assistance)
And, indeed, we were well ahead of most of the EU on that - so it can hardly be said that the EU was a real driving force when it comes to marriage equality.
It is a dreadfully shallow article - based on what-if scaremongering. There is no scenario in the medium to long term that I can see where current rights are under threat of removal. None at all. And if we were in the EU when such a threat were made, then I can't see such an extreme government giving a flying f*ck as to the niceties of EU rules!
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
I have no problem with NI getting their moment scraping the pork barrel - Scotland has been doing it for decades.
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
So how come the Tories lost their majority in June when 43.5% backed them?
To reiterate, Tories rarely lose elections when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them
It was far from ideal, but we didn't lose.
Not that old chestnut. Everyone* lost the 2017 election.
You lost, because you lost your hard-won majority. Corbyn lost because he stayed in opposition. The Lib Dems lost, because they lost two leaders and didn't make any progress.
Above all, we lost.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
That's like saying a football team that needed to win 2-0 for goal difference reasons and only won 1-0 lost the game.
May's team screwed up in 2017. They didn't lose in the sense of it leading to a change of government, but it wasn't exactly kittens and rainbows either.
Yup. Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
Theresa May doesn't agree with you – she said she lost the election (by her own definition). The fact that an anonymous Tory cheerleader on a internet forum says she won is immaterial.
Forming a government is a zero sum game. No-one else won, therefore by default we didn't lose.
It wasn't glorious, and wasn't expected. But it was not a loss.
So, yet again I suggest, the Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
I have no problem with NI getting their moment scraping the pork barrel - Scotland has been doing it for decades.
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
Perhaps they will see the light once Carwyn Jones is forced out of office for his bullying culture?
Older men suffering loss of status are the highest risk group for successful attempts, as we saw in Wales last autumn.
A fair point to be honest. Commentators and cartoonists shouldn’t really make jokes about metaphorical suicide, when there’s recent history of actual suicide among politicians.
Older men suffering loss of status are the highest risk group for successful attempts, as we saw in Wales last autumn.
Is abdication ok?
"But you must believe me when I tell you that I have found it impossible to carry the heavy burden of responsibility and to discharge my duties as UKIP leader as I would wish to do without the help and support of the woman I love."
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
It's very noticeable that the BBC - on the Marr show especially - tends to give right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites a pretty easy ride in interviews. My theory is that this is because its producers, editors and presenters are very conscious of the fact that their own views are diametrically opposed to both varieties and so they overcompensate to avoid accusations of bias. They do this because it is right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites who are quickest to shout bias. And that goes to show that doing it works. So it is not going to stop.
Marr is a weird and totally unconvincing mix of politics and entertainment. Why it has to be part South Bank Show is a mystery - unless it is something to do with arcane BBC budgeting rules?
We’re one of the top nations when it comes to LGBTI rights.
I think it gnaws at some that the evil Tories introduced same sex marriage.
(With Lib Dem assistance)
And, indeed, we were well ahead of most of the EU on that - so it can hardly be said that the EU was a real driving force when it comes to marriage equality.
It is a dreadfully shallow article - based on what-if scaremongering. There is no scenario in the medium to long term that I can see where current rights are under threat of removal. None at all. And if we were in the EU when such a threat were made, then I can't see such an extreme government giving a flying f*ck as to the niceties of EU rules!
Quite. The EU had nothing to do with the decriminalisation of homosexuality or the introduction of civil partnerships or gay marriage.
And Keith Vaz assured us that the Charter of Rights has no more legal standing than the Beano.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
I have no problem with NI getting their moment scraping the pork barrel - Scotland has been doing it for decades.
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
The funny thing is that, despite the extra spending on offer, the politicians of NI still haven’t agreed to form the government that can spend the money.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
I have no problem with NI getting their moment scraping the pork barrel - Scotland has been doing it for decades.
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
Norther Ireland has received the highest proportion block grant payment per head 'for decades'. Still, it's nice that your generous spirit welcomes the good people of NI getting even more.
* Apart from maybe the DUP who hit a million dollar jackpot.
Typical Labour, mixing up your millions and your billions......
The DUP didn't of course get £1 billion - Northern Ireland did for spending on mental health, infrastructure and more.
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
I have no problem with NI getting their moment scraping the pork barrel - Scotland has been doing it for decades.
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
The funny thing is that, despite the extra spending on offer, the politicians of NI still haven’t agreed to form the government that can spend the money.
The last thing that Sinn Fein would want is more money being spent in Northern Ireland.
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
It's very noticeable that the BBC - on the Marr show especially - tends to give right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites a pretty easy ride in interviews. My theory is that this is because its producers, editors and presenters are very conscious of the fact that their own views are diametrically opposed to both varieties and so they overcompensate to avoid accusations of bias. They do this because it is right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites who are quickest to shout bias. And that goes to show that doing it works. So it is not going to stop.
Marr is a weird and totally unconvincing mix of politics and entertainment. Why it has to be part South Bank Show is a mystery - unless it is something to do with arcane BBC budgeting rules?
I think it is that he is far more interested in the arts than he is in politics or the news. He does the program as long as he is allowed to indulge his real interests to a certain degree.
The far left of which Corbyn, McDonnell, Milne, Williamson and co are a part has always hated Attlee - he was a patriotic, pragmatic leader who showed that you can achieve fundamental change through Parliament. The far left sees Parliament as a tool of the bourgeoisie and as a result has opposed every Labour government there has ever been.
Regarding women, I suspect if and when John McDonnell's comments about Esther McVey get a wider airing they'll take a hit with women voters.
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
The BBC bottled the chance to confront McDonnell with the audio of his comments yesterday. They asked him if he wanted them to play it, he said no, so they didn't.
Not a good day for that editor
It's very noticeable that the BBC - on the Marr show especially - tends to give right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites a pretty easy ride in interviews. My theory is that this is because its producers, editors and presenters are very conscious of the fact that their own views are diametrically opposed to both varieties and so they overcompensate to avoid accusations of bias. They do this because it is right wing Brexiteers and left wing Corbynites who are quickest to shout bias. And that goes to show that doing it works. So it is not going to stop.
Marr is a weird and totally unconvincing mix of politics and entertainment. Why it has to be part South Bank Show is a mystery - unless it is something to do with arcane BBC budgeting rules?
I think the idea is to make it the Sunday papers on the telly. But I agree that it doesn't work at all. Not least because Marr is such a poor interviewer.
The far left of which Corbyn, McDonnell, Milne, Williamson and co are a part has always hated Attlee - he was a patriotic, pragmatic leader who showed that you can achieve fundamental change through Parliament. The far left sees Parliament as a tool of the bourgeoisie and as a result has opposed every Labour government there has ever been.
Well he would have to get elected first and I doubt he will match Attlee's landslide. Though from a leftwinger's perspective Corbyn is probably the best Labour leader since Attlee. Foot was ideologically similar to Corbyn but did not get anywhere near as close to Thatcher as Corbyn got to May (albeit in part because of the SDP)
Comments
Otherwise using your terminology the SNP lost the last Holyrood election and Merkel has never won one.
...we have the Wizard of Oz. We are sleepwalking into a hurricane. Every month that goes by, Britain’s situation gets weaker, bringing us closer to a total European capitulation and a Corbyn government.
The Tories seem to think they can wait and then use Mrs May as a Brexit scapegoat. They are putting party before country and the public won’t buy it. If they won’t rip the curtain away now, Brussels will do it for them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/21/seen-enough-know-theresa-may-cant-change-must-go/
If I lose just six seats..
What kind of lawyer do you call yourself?
"May urged to secure EU trade deal with ‘Norway-style’ payments"
https://www.ft.com/content/5d2ffe8e-fd40-11e7-a492-2c9be7f3120a
Looks like we'll be getting a bells and whistles trade deal then.
How many more resignations will it take for Henry Bolton to finally see that he cannot survive?
Who on earth would want to take on the leadership of a broke party?
Cui bono from the death of UKIP?
Mrs May is a loser.
She lost Dave's majority.
Worst of all, she lost Dave's majority against the IRA sympathising Trot that is Corbyn.
For that alone she deserves to branded a loser.
However not ANY woman leader,- it must be a woman leader not from Corbyn's hard left faction. A Diane Abbott leadership would be an apocalyptic disaster for Labour. I have grave doubts about Angela Rayner who does not appear prime ministerial -nothing to do with her accent..
In my view Emily Thornberry would be the ideal candidate. She is neither Corbynista nor Blairite, but mainstream (no one has led Labour from the mainstream since John Smith) looks prime ministerial, and would unite the party. If she were Labour leader, I would start voting Labour again-I will not do so as long as Corbyn is around.
But I expect Corbyn will plod on until defeat in 2022.
https://twitter.com/Raphael_Hogarth/status/955378903564079105
A female Shadow Chancellor might make sense.
Javi Gracia or the next UKIP leader?
If you think May didn't win last June, go and knock on the door of 10 Downing Street, and prepare to be amazed when Jeremy Corbyn doesn't open it.
By this very silly metric, Donald Trump is FULL OF WIN, and the Daddy of them all is Robert Mugabe.
That job’s a bit of an ejector seat. He’s their fifth manager in less than 2 years.
Mr. Eagles, ah, cheers. Still, I bet failures get their golden parachutes, no?
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/955391644823584768
Since he split up with his wife and was poking the racist ?
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/913779981423169536
I agree that Labour will go for a woman to succeed Corbyn - I rate Thornberry highly but harbour a pet theory that women leaders are only elected when then they come from the political right - Thatcher OK, May OK, Clinton not - so disagree with Don`s headline about a subsequent Labour polling breakthrough. My hunch is that the choosing of a female Labour leader will enhance Tory chances at the next election rather than the other way round.
'Steiner's assault will bring it under control.'
Not a good day for that editor
We’ve always had better technology and equipment than the Russians, even if they could outnumber us with boots on the ground. But under Putin the Russkis are investing in R&D more than they have done for three decades, at a time when our own forces are stretched both in terms of men and machines.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/955143210128564225
As Labour leads with women already, and trails in men, particularly with older socially conservatives, there may be a shift in the direction as you say.
Mostly whoever follows Jezza, male or female, will struggle to hold onto his personal vote. People like his authenticity and consistency, and that may not be transferrable.
He is healthy and lives for politics. I cannot see him stepping down before the next GE.
If you are going on radio to talk about defence spending as Shadow Defence Secretary, it is not unreasonable to know the costs you are talking about.
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/955358656274591744
Apparently leaving the EU will result in the destruction of LGBT rights?! So i expect there to be a mass exodus to Hungary and Poland in this case...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/22/eu-protection-lgbt-people-persecution-withdrawal-bill-lgbt-gay-rights
Under Labour we would presumably be spending billions if not tens of billions more on payments to bankers, hedge funds and overseas sovereign wealth funds - in debt interest on the extra borrowing they would incur.
Are those with mental health issues in Ulster less deserving of money than hedge funds and investment banks?
We’re one of the top nations when it comes to LGBTI rights.
I think it gnaws at some that the evil Tories introduced same sex marriage.
(With Lib Dem assistance)
John McDonnell got let off yesterday and Nigel Farage has been before. The BBC desperately need a younger Andrew Neil to replace him when he retires, and there’s no sign of them having found him (or her) yet.
Older men suffering loss of status are the highest risk group for successful attempts, as we saw in Wales last autumn.
The UKIP NEC has been the scourge of Farage, prevented Woolfe (who could have been a very effective leader) from standing, totally undermined Diane James so she quit and was hostile to the reforms Bolton was planning to reduce their powers. They have in no small part played a big role in the effective end of UKIP as a serious national party.
It wasn't glorious, and wasn't expected. But it was not a loss.
So, yet again I suggest, the Tories rarely lose an election when they can motivate more than 40% of the voting public to back them.
It is a dreadfully shallow article - based on what-if scaremongering. There is no scenario in the medium to long term that I can see where current rights are under threat of removal. None at all. And if we were in the EU when such a threat were made, then I can't see such an extreme government giving a flying f*ck as to the niceties of EU rules!
Just have to feel sorry for Wales. If only they'd stop electing so many Labour politicians, they might have their chance?
UKIP ought to disband, to save further embarrassment.
But for fuck's sake.
Corbyn's better than Attlee?
I have no more words.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/955380758218264576
Will the last person to leave UKIP please turn the lights off? They can't afford to put another 50p in the meter...
"But you must believe me when I tell you that I have found it impossible to carry the heavy burden of responsibility and to discharge my duties as UKIP leader as I would wish to do without the help and support of the woman I love."
And Keith Vaz assured us that the Charter of Rights has no more legal standing than the Beano.
Actually, let's hope he did.
The far left of which Corbyn, McDonnell, Milne, Williamson and co are a part has always hated Attlee - he was a patriotic, pragmatic leader who showed that you can achieve fundamental change through Parliament. The far left sees Parliament as a tool of the bourgeoisie and as a result has opposed every Labour government there has ever been.
We are beginning to get into Flanders and Swann territory. Wasn't "the reluctant cannibal" deputy assistant to the assistant deputy chief?