On topic, we've established that the Republicans can't do it on a wet Tuesday in Ohio. But can they do it for the big match?
I'm inclined to agree with the markets but it's not automatic that Republicans who don't care about special elections will feel equally lethargic about the midterms.
Trump will not be on the ballot in November. TRUMP voters are less likely to be fired up to vote for the GOP congressional leadership than Democrats will be to vote against Trump. Same in 2010 when many minorities and liberals who voted for Obama in 2008 and came out again in 2012 could not be bothered in 2012 while Republicans came out to vote against Obama.
If the swing last night is repeated in November the Democrats will take the House
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of people think former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson should apologise for comments he made about women wearing the burka while 48% of people think he should not say sorry
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 33% of people believe it is racist to describe women in burkas as letter boxes and bank robbers while 60% of people think it is not
Makes you wonder about the 12% of people which think it's not racist, but Boris should apologise anyway......
There are probably quite a few people who think that Boris' comments aren't racist but are rude.
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of people think former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson should apologise for comments he made about women wearing the burka while 48% of people think he should not say sorry
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 33% of people believe it is racist to describe women in burkas as letter boxes and bank robbers while 60% of people think it is not
Makes you wonder about the 12% of people which think it's not racist, but Boris should apologise anyway......
There are probably quite a few people who think that Boris' comments aren't racist but are rude.
That's great polling for Boris to be honest. Consider the probable split for Conservative voters, then consider the likely split for Tory members. He'll be crushing it.
I expect that Tory voters would split about 2:1 that Boris should not apologise and 3:1 in favour of banning the burka in public places.
IMO we ought to be concentrating on applying the current law on things like forced marriage and FGM rather than wasting time on a burka ban. It clearly isn't as serious as those issues.
I think it is pretty close, imagine having to spend your entire life when you go out having to wear sheets over your head with just a slit cut for your eyes. It is horrendously oppresive and I cant believe that the vast majority of burka wearers do so out of choice.
I think it’s a bit more complicated than being “forced” to wear the burka. The cultural environment has been created where they feel guilty/immodest for going without. Gaslighting on an epic scale
"Know ye that it is the will of Allah (SWT) that we are all born stark raving naked!" - Grand Ayatollah Nudistani
You’ve posted that a dozen times in the last 48 hours. It wasn’t funny the first time.
Bro! Bro! Do you accept it was Allah's will that you were born? What were you wearing when you were born?
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 45% of people think former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson should apologise for comments he made about women wearing the burka while 48% of people think he should not say sorry
Sky News Breaking A poll by @SkyData suggests 33% of people believe it is racist to describe women in burkas as letter boxes and bank robbers while 60% of people think it is not
Makes you wonder about the 12% of people which think it's not racist, but Boris should apologise anyway......
There are probably quite a few people who think that Boris' comments aren't racist but are rude.
That's great polling for Boris to be honest. Consider the probable split for Conservative voters, then consider the likely split for Tory members. He'll be crushing it.
Yup. Looks like Boris, after being gee'd up by Bannon, is going to strike early and capitalise on the clusterfuck that October will bring.
Perhaps Boris just wants to sure up the base ready for the Great Brexit Betrayal when he'll come out for Remain and a second referendum.
In the case of Boris, and Boris alone, I wouldn’t rule anything out.
I've taken a week off for miscellanous idleness, so I decided I'd follow up a BT email saying they were going to increase my broadband fee (by a modest amount now and by 100% in a year), and if I wanted to prevent this I should give them a call to discuss it or cancel.
! rang the number for cancelling. It rang and rang. I got with other things, but after 25 minutes I gave up.
I then rang the general BT helpline. This time I got someone after 15 minutes. I said I could see there was an offer which was £5 cheaper, and other loss-leading providers that were cheaper stil, so I'd decided to switch, what steps should I take?
He said how about we make it £2 cheaper?
I said no, that was still £3 more * 24 months. Let's just call it a day.
He said in that case, how about £4 cheaper? Just £1/month more than the others, saves the hassle.
I said OK. But I wanted to switch my mobile for similar reasons.
He said ah, in that case we can reduce your landline by a further £2 so long as you don't switch the mobile.
Thoughts:
1. Shouldn't Ofcom look into a cancellation line that doesn't actually answer? 2. Is it in the public interest that list prices are fictitious and the actual price is determined by how much you haggle, like a bazaar?
BT are the worst. The broadband and line rental customers are nothing but a cash cow to fund their ridiculous TV ambitions and to buy up over priced second rate sports rights. I resent that I, and the rest of the country that uses any variation of ADSL, fund their stupid TV priorities while Britain sits in the broadband slow lane. I wish Ofcom had followed through last year and demerged Openreach from BT and forced them to float it as a separate company which looks after the broadband and phone network.
I wouldn't usually swear on these hallowed pages, but anyone who has ever had to spend hours upon hours getting BT Internet's ----ing stupid Home Hub and their ----ing stupid email to work will never go near them again. My inlaws (whose ----ing stupid BT Internet connection I have spent too many days fixing) are under no illusions now that if they buy another BT product, they're on their own with it.
The utterly cynical bit is that BT do own a halfway competent phone line and Internet provider. It's called PlusNet. They answer the phone, they don't stiff you on pricing, and the reliability is fine. Basically BT Group are segmenting their audience into "people we can stiff" and "people where we have to accept lower margins to retain their custom". It's a pretty despicable way of doing business.
In the case of Boris, and Boris alone, I wouldn’t rule anything out.
That was the original plan by Boris.
From 2015
BORIS JOHNSON is preparing to call for a no vote in Britain’s referendum on the European Union in an attempt to extract greater concessions from Brussels than David Cameron is demanding.
In a stance that puts him on a collision course with the prime minister, the mayor of London believes Britain should reject any deal Cameron puts forward because the EU will not give enough ground.
Johnson has told friends that a no vote is desirable because it would prompt Brussels to offer a much better deal, which the public could then support in a second referendum.
Johnson said: We need to be bold. You have to show them that you are serious.
The mayor’s views, shared with friends last week, will send shockwaves through Downing Street. Both the yes and no camps had assumed that he would support Cameron in arguing for Britain to vote yes.
One of the worst things about modern life is people being forced to apologise for offending someone, when they aren't sorry at all.
I'd agree with that. Many times people should be sorry but are not, and we can usually tell when they are not, so it is just insulting to everyone involved if they make a blatantly insincere apology. We would also then be spared the embarrassing spectacle of people trying to to pretend a fake apology is a real apology, or saying it is all resolved as a result only to have to face it again when the not sorry person inevitably does it again. It just gives people the leeway to escape any consequences, as we do all look for excuses to, well, excuse people on our side, so a fake apology often does that at least, but is usually so cringeworthy.
The utterly cynical bit is that BT do own a halfway competent phone line and Internet provider. It's called PlusNet. They answer the phone, they don't stiff you on pricing, and the reliability is fine. Basically BT Group are segmenting their audience into "people we can stiff" and "people where we have to accept lower margins to retain their custom". It's a pretty despicable way of doing business.
I'm with BT having moved from Plusnet, as I moved and there is no FTTC option here, so I went with BT as Plusnet don't offer FTTP/H which is the only option for decent broadband here (And just so happens to be the best {ceteris paribus})
I wouldn't usually swear on these hallowed pages, but anyone who has ever had to spend hours upon hours getting BT Internet's ----ing stupid Home Hub and their ----ing stupid email to work will never go near them again. My inlaws (whose ----ing stupid BT Internet connection I have spent too many days fixing) are under no illusions now that if they buy another BT product, they're on their own with it.
The utterly cynical bit is that BT do own a halfway competent phone line and Internet provider. It's called PlusNet. They answer the phone, they don't stiff you on pricing, and the reliability is fine. Basically BT Group are segmenting their audience into "people we can stiff" and "people where we have to accept lower margins to retain their custom". It's a pretty despicable way of doing business.
They do that with BT Mobile and EE as well.
My mate pointed out how he 'saved' £250 per year by switching from EE to BT Mobile for exactly the same handset and monthly allowance.
I've taken a week off for miscellanous idleness, so I decided I'd follow up a BT email saying they were going to increase my broadband fee (by a modest amount now and by 100% in a year), and if I wanted to prevent this I should give them a call to discuss it or cancel.
Useful tip: every time they do that, tell them to get lost, cancel the contract, and sign up to a competitor via cashback sites( quidco or topcashback). You can regularly get £100+ that way, the offers vary - recently EE were doing £175 or so.
If you bounce between BT and others, you can do this twice a year, and get your phone/broadband for near free.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
JRM would likely see a surge in Tory membership from the nationalist hard right and ex UKIP and EDL just as Corbyn saw a surge in Labour membership from the militant far left and ex SWP (the Communist Party for example has endorsed Corbyn)
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Dominic Grieve and a couple of others maybe ? It'd be a very low number I expect, most Conservatives tend to stay in the party when there's someone in charge they don't like and try and work from within.
It'd be many more with Mogg in charge, but that definitely won't happen...
One of my friends is in the interesting position of being a big Boris booster but has told me privately he'd leave if Mogg was in charge. He's not posted anything since Boris' column......
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
I'd remain a member if Boris or JRM became leader.
I wouldn't lift a finger to help the party win seats, with exceptions of people I liked, liked Anna Soubry, JohnO, and Tissue Price.
Our rules allow us to ditch a useless leader safe in the knowledge they cannot stand in the subsequent leadership contest, so I'd remain in the hope of us returning to sanity.
However if the successor of JRM/Boris was another idiot like those two then I'd probably be heading out of the door thinking my party has left me.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
JRM would likely see a surge in Tory membership from the nationalist hard right just as Corbyn saw a surge in Labpur membership from the militant far left (the Communist Party for example has endorsed Corbyn)
Quite possibly. I wouldn't want to be a member of such a party; I'm only interested in a Conservative Party which wants to be a serious party of government.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
CCHQ would never have known about SDP member rolls.
As I've said there's plenty of photographic evidence that the likes of Grayling defected, but non for Anna Soubry.
But since you can never admit you're wrong, I'll end this conversation.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
As a Tory MP seen as suspiciously pro EU Soubry has good reason to deny it
I've taken a week off for miscellanous idleness, so I decided I'd follow up a BT email saying they were going to increase my broadband fee (by a modest amount now and by 100% in a year), and if I wanted to prevent this I should give them a call to discuss it or cancel.
! rang the number for cancelling. It rang and rang. I got with other things, but after 25 minutes I gave up.
I then rang the general BT helpline. This time I got someone after 15 minutes. I said I could see there was an offer which was £5 cheaper, and other loss-leading providers that were cheaper stil, so I'd decided to switch, what steps should I take?
He said how about we make it £2 cheaper?
I said no, that was still £3 more * 24 months. Let's just call it a day.
He said in that case, how about £4 cheaper? Just £1/month more than the others, saves the hassle.
I said OK. But I wanted to switch my mobile for similar reasons.
He said ah, in that case we can reduce your landline by a further £2 so long as you don't switch the mobile.
Thoughts:
1. Shouldn't Ofcom look into a cancellation line that doesn't actually answer? 2. Is it in the public interest that list prices are fictitious and the actual price is determined by how much you haggle, like a bazaar?
Funnily enough it seemed to stop working (the haggling) with Three some time ago. Ring up to say you're cancelling? Fine, see ya they said
That said recently they have taken to offering good deals or improvements without prompting. So maybe they're worrying about switching again.
It does generally work with BT, though. Every year I go through the same charade, ringing them up to express concern about how much they are quoting for a new contract, and every year they offer a special reduction if I will renew for another term. It's worse than renewing your car insurance.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
Richard I've never agreed with you on very much but why would you leave immediately in the event of JRM4PM? I wouldn't have had you a million miles apart.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true. The idea she would be worried now if people knew the truth is pretty thin, since if was so worried what people think of her, and willing to hide aspects of herself as a result, she'd not say or do many of the things she does.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
JRM would likely see a surge in Tory membership from the nationalist hard right just as Corbyn saw a surge in Labpur membership from the militant far left (the Communist Party for example has endorsed Corbyn)
Quite possibly. I wouldn't want to be a member of such a party; I'm only interested in a Conservative Party which wants to be a serious party of government.
In a Mogg v Corbyn general election either could win absent a viable centrist third party alternative
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true.
It's also easy to see why on the Conservative side they could have assumed she'd defected even if she never joined the SDP.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true.
Some Broxtowe Tories have tried to deselect her, it would be another feather in their cap
Richard I've never agreed with you on very much but why would you leave immediately in the event of JRM4PM? I wouldn't have had you a million miles apart.
Because it would indicate that the Conservative Party is no longer interested in winning elections, governing for whole nation, or living in the 21st century. I can't be bothered with ideological cults, the reason I'm a member in the first place is to help get good government. (I know, I know, but at least Theresa May tries..)
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true.
Some Broxtowe Tories have tried to deselect her, it would be another feather in their cap
And she is perfectly content to continue to act in ways which upset some in her constituency such that they tried to deselect her. The idea she is willing to take that on and not modulate her pro EU views in any way - quite the contrary in fact - but is terrified enough to lie about something that happened so long ago, is bloody ridiculous.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true.
Some Broxtowe Tories have tried to deselect her, it would be another feather in their cap
In a Mogg v Corbyn general election either could win absent a viable centrist third party alternative
Possibly, but that wouldn't absolve the Conservative Party of the responsibility to choose a serious leader.
Of course, if it were JRM vs Corbyn I'd still vote Conservative - Corbyn is an existential threat to the country's prosperity, security, and liberty.
The Tories would be on 35% under JRM with Yougov v Corbyn which while less than the 38% under Boris or May would still be more than they got from 1997 to 2005.
As a Tory MP seen as suspiciously pro EU Soubry has good reason to deny it
She has no reason at all to deny it other than it being untrue. One thing about Anna Soubry, love her or hate her, is that she doesn't mess about with pointless lies. She always says what she believes to be true - often in very direct ways.
Imagine the outrage if a leading politician — a man, indeed, who could well be our next Prime Minister — had been revealed to have spoken sneeringly about Chasidic Jews, attacking their clothes and hats and implying that they somehow did not belong in Britain.
It does not require much imagination, given the appalling comments by the Leader of the Opposition unearthed daily.
But we are not referring to Mr Corbyn.
Had Boris Johnson written about Chasidic Jews in the way he discussed Muslim women who wear the niqab, the Jewish community — and many others — would rightly have condemned his words.
Despite his image, Mr Johnson is no fool. He knew what he was doing when he wrote that Muslim women who wear the niqab look like letter boxes and bank robbers. He was turning a perfectly valid criticism of the veil into dog-whistle politics of the worst kind.
This is the key point. It is perfectly appropriate that Islamic religious practices — as with any religion — should be criticised. Indeed, in a free society it is vital that the fundamental tenets of any religion should be critiqued.
But Mr Johnson is well aware that, while anyone should be able to condemn the niqab, the form of words used to make that condemnation is vital. And Mr Johnson’s words were those of a bar-room bigot.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
Quite frankly given she did leave the Tories at one time, and in any case is not shy or embarrassed about being out of step with some major elements of the current party, I don't see why she would care to deny it, I assume she would admit it were it true.
Some Broxtowe Tories have tried to deselect her, it would be another feather in their cap
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
Chris Grayling being in the SDP is always a bit of an odd one.
Greg Clark too and Vince Cable
Not sure Vince being in the SDP is a great shock.
I don’t expect anyone to hold the same politics their entire lives. It’s a journey. Almost as if a career in politics and the world of ideas are not necessarily inclusive.
Tony Benn the moderate, progressive, greasy pole climbing Labour MP is probably not the one you remember. But that was Benn till he got “religion” later in life from some books on Marx and The Leverllers. He claimed he’d never even heard of the leverllers till that point.
She said it was wrong, someone got the wrong end of the stick.
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Soubry was recorded in Central Office records in the early 1980s as having defected to the SDP and academic Tim Evans also recorded her defection when writing about the youth movements of the period as she was an NUS member at the time
Yah, of course Central Office and Tim Evans (whoever he is) are infallible, and know better than Anna Soubry does whether Anna Soubry joined the SDP.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Arriving back in Manchester from JFK, the gent beside me, earing a strange costume, reading a book backwards and wearing ceremonial robes, asked me to help him fill in the landing card.
We went through the instructions together until I got to the employment section.
"Employment?" I asked him. He looked shocked. "Employment," I repeated "What do you do for a living? What is your job" I asked slowly.
He shook his head in disbelief. "I'm a rabbi," he said.
For some reason, he seemed to think it amazing that I'd never seen a rabbi before. I suppose they're common in the USA, but they do wear peculiar paraphernalia.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Presumably then if it did happen, Boris would call an election pretty quickly.
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Presumably then if it did happen, Boris would call an election pretty quickly.
Under those circumstances it wouldn't be in his gift to call one. It would all depend on Corbyn's confidence -or lack of confidence.
Arriving back in Manchester from JFK, the gent beside me, earing a strange costume, reading a book backwards and wearing ceremonial robes, asked me to help him fill in the landing card.
We went through the instructions together until I got to the employment section.
"Employment?" I asked him. He looked shocked. "Employment," I repeated "What do you do for a living? What is your job" I asked slowly.
He shook his head in disbelief. "I'm a rabbi." he said.
For some reason, he seemed to think it amazing that I'd never seen a rabbi before. I suppose they're common in the USA, but they do wear peculiar paraphernalia.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
The Gaitskill quote is equally clear about the direction of travel.
That all being said, Edward Heath in particular disassembled on the issue.
Gaitskell who died in 1963 and was talking at the time when we first tried to join, which just highlights how long the debate had run by that point.
I don't think it's correct to say that Heath dissembled. Particularly in the 1975 referendum campaign he was crystal clear than the primary purpose of the Community was political.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Howard Flight was treated unfairly. I wouldn't use that as a yardstick.
I don't think that at this stage, Boris' behaviour would merit expulsion from the Conservative party. After all, Kenneth Clarke has said some uncomplimentary things about burkas.
I've no doubt that in 40 years time, if we stay in the EU, they will be saying "If you had read the EU treat properly, you would have seen that others countries, including Turkey were always likely to join. It was made quite clear."
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
The single market and free movement did not come into being until after the 1987 Single Market Act coming to fruition in 1993 and did not expand to Eastern Europe until 2004. The Euro did not arrive until 1999
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
Islamophobia has three strands.
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
The single market and free movement did not come into being until after the 1987 Single Market Act coming to fruition in 1993 and did not expand to Eastern Europe until 2004. The Euro did not arrive until 1999
Free movement was in the Treaty of Rome from the beginning. I'm not sure what the point of the rest of your post was supposed to be.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Howard Flight was treated unfairly. I wouldn't use that as a yardstick.
I don't think that at this stage, Boris' behaviour would merit expulsion from the Conservative party. After all, Kenneth Clarke has said some uncomplimentary things about burkas.
For a mainstream sociallly liberal Tory to cast his net towards the extreme right (not just of his party but to those with baser political instincts) for the sole purpose of realising his own ambitions, hell yes, that merits expulsion! Once out he could join Batten's UKIP where his rhetoric belongs.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
The single market and free movement did not come into being until after the 1987 Single Market Act coming to fruition in 1993 and did not expand to Eastern Europe until 2004. The Euro did not arrive until 1999
Free movement was in the Treaty of Rome from the beginning. I'm not sure what the point of the rest of your post was supposed to be.
Although until the Single European Act, countries were allowed to discriminate against non-citizens.
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Presumably then if it did happen, Boris would call an election pretty quickly.
Under those circumstances it wouldn't be in his gift to call one. It would all depend on Corbyn's confidence -or lack of confidence.
Corbyn voted for an election when he was something like 20pts down last time. I dont think he'd hesitate to take on Boris.
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
Islamophobia has three strands.
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
1. Should be condemned, 2 and 3 are fair game.
If Johnson's article ticks any of those boxes its the first one.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
The single market and free movement did not come into being until after the 1987 Single Market Act coming to fruition in 1993 and did not expand to Eastern Europe until 2004. The Euro did not arrive until 1999
Free movement was in the Treaty of Rome from the beginning. I'm not sure what the point of the rest of your post was supposed to be.
It was the single market which enshrined free movement of workers and citizens in law but it was the expansion to less economically developed Eastern European nations which caused the biggest problem as they had most incentive to come to the UK and which saw the biggest surge of migrants to the UK, exacerbated admittedly by Blair's failure to impose transition controls.
The creation of the Euro started the shift to the UK being on the outer fringe of the EU, we had no desire to be part of a political and economic union unlike the original founders of the Treaty of Rome our interests were more based on trade in common with Switzerland and Scandinavia who we were joined with in EFTA before joining the EEC
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Presumably then if it did happen, Boris would call an election pretty quickly.
Under those circumstances it wouldn't be in his gift to call one. It would all depend on Corbyn's confidence -or lack of confidence.
Corbyn voted for an election when he was something like 20pts down last time. I dont think he'd hesitate to take on Boris.
I was just saying it is not entirely at the whim of Johnson. If Corbyn does indeed want to be creamed with a landslide, Johnson will have to take enough moderate/remain Tories/ Labourites with him to breach the fixed term threshold.
I've no doubt that in 40 years time, if we stay in the EU, they will be saying "If you had read the EU treat properly, you would have seen that others countries, including Turkey were always likely to join. It was made quite clear."
Well, it's impossible for a country to join the EU without the approval of all members. This isn't something that could be "majoritied" away, because the EU is an institution created by a treaty between all its members.
So how do you deal with the fact that the Greeks and the Cypriots will never accept Turkey as a member?
I mean this in all seriousness. There's 2,000 years of history that can't be overcome.
And I suspect it's not just them. We also have a veto, and so do all the Eastern European countries. And France. Do you know how popular admitting Turkey is? The EU can't simply make countries sign an accession treaty. The only way Turkey would be admitted would be if it was sufficiently popular in all 27 remaining EU countries that no government saw electoral advantage in vetoing it.
For decades, British and EU politicians (and the US) wanted Turkey on-side in the Middle East. And that meant holding out the carrot of EU membership. But when push came to shove, it has never been a realistic prospect.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
That doesn't support your case.
The Mail says that political union won't come until we, the French and the Germans are ready for it.
The time is now. It seems as if the French and the Germans will acquiesce - or not be asked.
We were asked and aren't ready.
But given that Europe refused to give us worthwhile commitments to respect the fact we weren't ready then we had no choice but to leave.
That doesn't sound as if we were the equal partners that the Mail article implies.
There were worthwhile commitments to respect the UK's status outside the Eurozone in Cameron's deal. It's nobody's fault but your own and your fellow Brexiteers' that nationalistic hubris compelled you to reject it.
Its not racist, it's rude. Of course. How can it be racist if Islam is not a race?
Or if Islam is a race then so is Christianity. And anyone who insults Christianity is therefore a racist.
I suppose that is too logical.
It's not of course a requirement of Islam anyway - All that is required is to dress modestly (and that includes men!). And for many women who do wear it in the world it is certainly not a choice.
Muslim women from south East Asian majority Islamic nations like Malaysia and Indonesia for example don't wear burqas or niqabs or any full face coverings - they do wear hijabs though. It is a function of historic Arabic middle eastern culture which was then became linked to Islam.
Why for example do Muslims not eat pork and men get circumcised? Because the prophet borrowed the idea from Judaism - specifically the Jews of Medina. Not everything about religions and practices is unique but is informed by local traditions and culture and from other sources!
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
JRM would likely see a surge in Tory membership from the nationalist hard right and ex UKIP and EDL just as Corbyn saw a surge in Labour membership from the militant far left and ex SWP (the Communist Party for example has endorsed Corbyn)
No problems anticipated because of that? Nope, I cannot think of any either.
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
I think what used to be caled race memory takes a long time to die. And Islam is on the wrong side of that.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
I don't know how old you are, but I was there and the overall picture that we thought we were voting on a common market is simply nor obscured by the isolated counter examples you provide. Check out the actual referendum question wording btw.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
That doesn't support your case.
The Mail says that political union won't come until we, the French and the Germans are ready for it.
The time is now. It seems as if the French and the Germans will acquiesce - or not be asked.
We were asked and aren't ready.
But given that Europe refused to give us worthwhile commitments to respect the fact we weren't ready then we had no choice but to leave.
That doesn't sound as if we were the equal partners that the Mail article implies.
There were worthwhile commitments to respect the UK's status outside the Eurozone in Cameron's deal. It's nobody's fault but your own and your fellow Brexiteers' that nationalistic hubris compelled you to reject it.
Have not senior EU officials been known to say sometimes it’s necessary to lie?
In which case we were right to have little faith in their commitments.
Of course the most significant thing to take away from what Grieve & Soubry (and I doubt they'd be the only two) are saying is that the moment Boris becomes PM is the moment that Conservative + DUP would no longer add up to a HOC majority.
Presumably then if it did happen, Boris would call an election pretty quickly.
Under those circumstances it wouldn't be in his gift to call one. It would all depend on Corbyn's confidence -or lack of confidence.
Corbyn voted for an election when he was something like 20pts down last time. I dont think he'd hesitate to take on Boris.
If Corbyn does indeed want to be creamed with a landslide, Johnson will have to take enough moderate/remain Tories/ Labourites with him to breach the fixed term threshold.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
I don't know how old you are, but I was there and the overall picture that we thought we were voting on a common market is simply nor obscured by the isolated counter examples you provide. Check out the actual referendum question wording btw.
Check out the actual main televised debate before the vote in which Heath repeatedly says that the Community's main purpose is political and that arguments about tariffs are secondary.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Powell arguably won the Tories the 1970 general election and Wilson the Feb 1974 general election. He was one of the most powerful politicians of the early 1970s
Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?
We joined the Common Market, if it was still the Common Market we would never have voted Leave
Really? If the Common Market had expanded to include 28 members we'd have had the same migration effects that you seem to think are the reason for Brexit, so why would that have made a difference?
Freedom of movement with six mostly wealthy Western European nations with similar standards of living and wages and welfare systems - plus Ireland who we had a common travel area with anyway - is a rather different proposition to 27 nations for many of which that cannot be said to be the case.
Mass migration within The Common market was a non issue in 1973 or 1975 - because it simply wasn't happening on any notable scale.
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
There certainly wasn't any secret about the political nature of the project.
That doesn't support your case.
The Mail says that political union won't come until we, the French and the Germans are ready for it.
The time is now. It seems as if the French and the Germans will acquiesce - or not be asked.
We were asked and aren't ready.
But given that Europe refused to give us worthwhile commitments to respect the fact we weren't ready then we had no choice but to leave.
That doesn't sound as if we were the equal partners that the Mail article implies.
There were worthwhile commitments to respect the UK's status outside the Eurozone in Cameron's deal. It's nobody's fault but your own and your fellow Brexiteers' that nationalistic hubris compelled you to reject it.
Have not senior EU officials been known to say sometimes it’s necessary to lie?
In which case we were right to have little faith in their commitments.
It's always right to be sceptical, but for scepticism to lead you to vote for national humiliation is taking it a step too far.
It would be interesting to see if such feeling was replicated among the membership, as we get little but talk from Labour non-Corbynites.
Soubry/Grieve's position being replicated amongst the membership generally ?
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
I don't mean that they would represent the general opinion of members, I mean would the members actually act as Grieve for instance indicates he would, that is to say would they leave?
Some certainly would, although not as many as would leave immediately if JRM became leader.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
JRM would likely see a surge in Tory membership from the nationalist hard right and ex UKIP and EDL just as Corbyn saw a surge in Labour membership from the militant far left and ex SWP (the Communist Party for example has endorsed Corbyn)
No problems anticipated because of that? Nope, I cannot think of any either.
Indeed, the Lords Farage and Yaxley- Lennon holding key cabinet portfolios would be interesting to say the least.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Howard Flight was treated unfairly. I wouldn't use that as a yardstick.
I don't think that at this stage, Boris' behaviour would merit expulsion from the Conservative party. After all, Kenneth Clarke has said some uncomplimentary things about burkas.
For a mainstream sociallly liberal Tory to cast his net towards the extreme right (not just of his party but to those with baser political instincts) for the sole purpose of realising his own ambitions, hell yes, that merits expulsion! Once out he could join Batten's UKIP where his rhetoric belongs.
As I am no longer a Conservative party member, it's probably not for me to say who they should or should not expel.
However, I think that kicking out a high profile MP whose opinions on this subject are widely shared by the public, would do the party far more harm than good.
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
Islamophobia has three strands.
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
1. Should be condemned, 2 and 3 are fair game.
I’d say 3 is absolutely fair game. I personally find outright hostility to religions (e.g. by atheists) rather rude, but that’s almost always directed at Christianity.
I am very close to (2) on Scientology and Jehovah’s Witness, both of which I find absolutely barking.
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
Islamophobia has three strands.
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
1. Should be condemned, 2 and 3 are fair game.
If Johnson's article ticks any of those boxes its the first one.
Most Muslim women in the UK or across the world don't wear burqas or niqabs. One might even argue the niqab and burqa is in fact represents no 3 - a political manifestation of Islam. It's wearing it's much more common now across the world than it was in the 1960s and 1970s and the Quran has not been rewritten!
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
Islamophobia has three strands.
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
1. Should be condemned, 2 and 3 are fair game.
I’d say 3 is absolutely fair game. I personally find outright hostility to religions (e.g. by atheists) rather rude, but that’s almost always directed at Christianity.
I am very close to (2) on Scientology and Jehovah’s Witness, both of which I find absolutely barking.
Scientology isn't a religion, it's closer to a political cult. There aren't many Jehovah's Witnesses although they are quite noisy and visible, so they are hardly an issue.
There are 1.8 billion Muslims but they are of course a minority within Europe.
I remember when Howard Flight had the whip withdrawn by Michael Howard in the 2005 General Election campaign. My recollection is that Flight advocated cited reducing government spending (Given Brown had spending cuts in the guise of the Gershwin review it was hardly worth the sacking but the Tories had become too sensitive to criticism about their approach to public spending) I think Boris should be measured against this and Boris is clearly on much worse ground. What is even worse is the repeated utilisation of creating racial tension in his newspaper columns since becoming an MP. I remember the "piccaninnies" and "watermelon smile" comments. I think Boris should be removed from the Tory party as he clearly seems to be following the Enoch Powell strategy of moving further to the margins in order to gain and monopolise a certain strand of thought on the extremes of public opinion.
Howard Flight was treated unfairly. I wouldn't use that as a yardstick.
I don't think that at this stage, Boris' behaviour would merit expulsion from the Conservative party. After all, Kenneth Clarke has said some uncomplimentary things about burkas.
For a mainstream sociallly liberal Tory to cast his net towards the extreme right (not just of his party but to those with baser political instincts) for the sole purpose of realising his own ambitions, hell yes, that merits expulsion! Once out he could join Batten's UKIP where his rhetoric belongs.
As I am no longer a Conservative party member, it's probably not for me to say who they should or should not expel.
However, I think that kicking out a high profile MP whose opinions on this subject are widely shared by the public, would do the party far more harm than good.
The public would see it as an elitist conspiracy to shut down and silence debate.
I could easily see it happen as social pressures and lobbying to be seen to punish such views, to demonstrate how strongly you don’t tolerate them and that it’s not what you’re about, are so strong that it’s hard to resist without being tarred by the same brush.
Comments
If the swing last night is repeated in November the Democrats will take the House
Then we take Stirling
The utterly cynical bit is that BT do own a halfway competent phone line and Internet provider. It's called PlusNet. They answer the phone, they don't stiff you on pricing, and the reliability is fine. Basically BT Group are segmenting their audience into "people we can stiff" and "people where we have to accept lower margins to retain their custom". It's a pretty despicable way of doing business.
From 2015
BORIS JOHNSON is preparing to call for a no vote in Britain’s referendum on the European Union in an attempt to extract greater concessions from Brussels than David Cameron is demanding.
In a stance that puts him on a collision course with the prime minister, the mayor of London believes Britain should reject any deal Cameron puts forward because the EU will not give enough ground.
Johnson has told friends that a no vote is desirable because it would prompt Brussels to offer a much better deal, which the public could then support in a second referendum.
Johnson said: We need to be bold. You have to show them that you are serious.
The mayor’s views, shared with friends last week, will send shockwaves through Downing Street. Both the yes and no camps had assumed that he would support Cameron in arguing for Britain to vote yes.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/28/schrodingers-referendum-as-boris-wants-voters-to-vote-yes-and-no-to-leaving-the-eu/
My mate pointed out how he 'saved' £250 per year by switching from EE to BT Mobile for exactly the same handset and monthly allowance.
If you bounce between BT and others, you can do this twice a year, and get your phone/broadband for near free.
No chance, it's the Tories not @WilliamGlenn wet dream.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5407047/amp/ANDREW-PIERCE-Proof-rebel-Anna-Soubry-did-join-SDP.html
As was pointed out the SDP made a big thing of Tory defectors to the SDP, they paraded the others but not her, the reason, she never defected.
Chris Grayling admitted she never defected too.
Personally I'd be out the next day if it was JRM. I'd give Boris a few weeks to see if he meant to be serious or not, but without much expectation that he did.
It'd be many more with Mogg in charge, but that definitely won't happen...
One of my friends is in the interesting position of being a big Boris booster but has told me privately he'd leave if Mogg was in charge.
He's not posted anything since Boris' column......
I wouldn't lift a finger to help the party win seats, with exceptions of people I liked, liked Anna Soubry, JohnO, and Tissue Price.
Our rules allow us to ditch a useless leader safe in the knowledge they cannot stand in the subsequent leadership contest, so I'd remain in the hope of us returning to sanity.
However if the successor of JRM/Boris was another idiot like those two then I'd probably be heading out of the door thinking my party has left me.
As I've said there's plenty of photographic evidence that the likes of Grayling defected, but non for Anna Soubry.
But since you can never admit you're wrong, I'll end this conversation.
Its not racist, it's rude. Of course. How can it be racist if Islam is not a race?
Or if Islam is a race then so is Christianity. And anyone who insults Christianity is therefore a racist.
I suppose that is too logical.
https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1026924415353860096
Of course, if it were JRM vs Corbyn I'd still vote Conservative - Corbyn is an existential threat to the country's prosperity, security, and liberty.
Imagine the outrage if a leading politician — a man, indeed, who could well be our next Prime Minister — had been revealed to have spoken sneeringly about Chasidic Jews, attacking their clothes and hats and implying that they somehow did not belong in Britain.
It does not require much imagination, given the appalling comments by the Leader of the Opposition unearthed daily.
But we are not referring to Mr Corbyn.
Had Boris Johnson written about Chasidic Jews in the way he discussed Muslim women who wear the niqab, the Jewish community — and many others — would rightly have condemned his words.
Despite his image, Mr Johnson is no fool. He knew what he was doing when he wrote that Muslim women who wear the niqab look like letter boxes and bank robbers. He was turning a perfectly valid criticism of the veil into dog-whistle politics of the worst kind.
This is the key point. It is perfectly appropriate that Islamic religious practices — as with any religion — should be criticised. Indeed, in a free society it is vital that the fundamental tenets of any religion should be critiqued.
But Mr Johnson is well aware that, while anyone should be able to condemn the niqab, the form of words used to make that condemnation is vital. And Mr Johnson’s words were those of a bar-room bigot.
https://www.thejc.com/comment/leaders/boris-johnson-burqa-niqab-shame-1.468132
Islamophobia is now the term used, isn't it? A dislike of Islam is also a peculiar concoction. Like 'Christianophobia' - a morbid dislike of the religion - that would be an opinion which many atheists might take (including some of my friends).
It's only when it comes down to disliking or hating individuals because they are Christian or Muslim that it becomes a real problem. Perhaps a new term is needed?
"Why do you think Powell's support for Brexit in 1975 didn't help?"
Because few believed the Common Market would evolve into the EU as it now is. As ludicrous a concept as Turkey joining the EU is now.
Tony Benn the moderate, progressive, greasy pole climbing Labour MP is probably not the one you remember. But that was Benn till he got “religion” later in life from some books on Marx and The Leverllers. He claimed he’d never even heard of the leverllers till that point.
A short anecdote if I may,
Arriving back in Manchester from JFK, the gent beside me, earing a strange costume, reading a book backwards and wearing ceremonial robes, asked me to help him fill in the landing card.
We went through the instructions together until I got to the employment section.
"Employment?" I asked him. He looked shocked. "Employment," I repeated "What do you do for a living? What is your job" I asked slowly.
He shook his head in disbelief. "I'm a rabbi," he said.
For some reason, he seemed to think it amazing that I'd never seen a rabbi before. I suppose they're common in the USA, but they do wear peculiar paraphernalia.
That all being said, Edward Heath in particular disassembled on the issue.
In 1975, I read the Daily Mirror not the Daily Mail. Are you suggesting that I should have done the opposite? Were you a Mail reader then?
A man in a rabbit costume would have seemed more likely.
I don't think it's correct to say that Heath dissembled. Particularly in the 1975 referendum campaign he was crystal clear than the primary purpose of the Community was political.
I don't think that at this stage, Boris' behaviour would merit expulsion from the Conservative party. After all, Kenneth Clarke has said some uncomplimentary things about burkas.
I've no doubt that in 40 years time, if we stay in the EU, they will be saying "If you had read the EU treat properly, you would have seen that others countries, including Turkey were always likely to join. It was made quite clear."
1. Prejudice against Muslims,
2. Hostility to Islam
3. Hostility to political manifestations of Islam.
1. Should be condemned, 2 and 3 are fair game.
I agree.
Replace Islam with Christianity and I'd also agree.
The creation of the Euro started the shift to the UK being on the outer fringe of the EU, we had no desire to be part of a political and economic union unlike the original founders of the Treaty of Rome our interests were more based on trade in common with Switzerland and Scandinavia who we were joined with in EFTA before joining the EEC
The Mail says that political union won't come until we, the French and the Germans are ready for it.
The time is now. It seems as if the French and the Germans will acquiesce - or not be asked.
We were asked and aren't ready.
But given that Europe refused to give us worthwhile commitments to respect the fact we weren't ready then we had no choice but to leave.
That doesn't sound as if we were the equal partners that the Mail article implies.
So how do you deal with the fact that the Greeks and the Cypriots will never accept Turkey as a member?
I mean this in all seriousness. There's 2,000 years of history that can't be overcome.
And I suspect it's not just them. We also have a veto, and so do all the Eastern European countries. And France. Do you know how popular admitting Turkey is? The EU can't simply make countries sign an accession treaty. The only way Turkey would be admitted would be if it was sufficiently popular in all 27 remaining EU countries that no government saw electoral advantage in vetoing it.
For decades, British and EU politicians (and the US) wanted Turkey on-side in the Middle East. And that meant holding out the carrot of EU membership. But when push came to shove, it has never been a realistic prospect.
Muslim women from south East Asian majority Islamic nations like Malaysia and Indonesia for example don't wear burqas or niqabs or any full face coverings - they do wear hijabs though. It is a function of historic Arabic middle eastern culture which was then became linked to Islam.
Why for example do Muslims not eat pork and men get circumcised? Because the prophet borrowed the idea from Judaism - specifically the Jews of Medina. Not everything about religions and practices is unique but is informed by local traditions and culture and from other sources!
In which case we were right to have little faith in their commitments.
Mass migration within The Common market was a non issue in 1973 or 1975 - because it simply wasn't happening on any notable scale.
However, I think that kicking out a high profile MP whose opinions on this subject are widely shared by the public, would do the party far more harm than good.
I am very close to (2) on Scientology and Jehovah’s Witness, both of which I find absolutely barking.
There are 1.8 billion Muslims but they are of course a minority within Europe.
I could easily see it happen as social pressures and lobbying to be seen to punish such views, to demonstrate how strongly you don’t tolerate them and that it’s not what you’re about, are so strong that it’s hard to resist without being tarred by the same brush.