I'm of the view that a Corbyn government is a certainty. I am not sure how it can be avoided.
Unfortunately those with memories of socialism in practice are passing away and we do not have enough students of history to compensate. This means that we have to go through a whole load of pain so the young can learn the reality of socialism. It should then protect us from another does for another 30 years or so but it may take that long to recover!
One might equally say the same about Conservative government, whenever it goes off the rails and gets distracted from the economy by its various political obsessions. Brexit will make the poll tax look like small beer.
I think we're heading for an agreement on citizens' rights - this always seemed likely to be an early win, and it may lead to something of a false dawn about the talks - "not going to be as hard as we thought". Might even help May's ratings for a while...
As for McDonnell, he overdoes his rhetoric at times, but personally I think Governments need a tough figure in the top team - one can't live by idealism alone. The reason the programme was more or less costed wihout splurges on some obvious places (benefits being the obvious one) is I suspect largely down to him. He's made an effort to prepare as Shadow Chancellor, which opposition chancellors really usually don't. What he hasn't yet done is complete the transition from far-left campaigner to potential Chancellor, in a way that Corbyn has visibly done for the top job.
So let's get this straight. Ann Winterton makes a sick joke in passing at a dinner about the death of the Chinese cockle pickers, and you go squealing to the media and she has the whip withdrawn.
McDonnell attempts to make sick political capital (and I'm guessing incorrectly) about the death of at least 79 people, and it's just overdone rhetoric?
Just remind ourselves how accurate these pollsters were at the GE.
Survation were almost spot on, Panelbase understated Labour and overstated the Tories.
Why do you ask ?
Because the polls were crap in 205 they were crap in 2017. The trustworthiness of any poll is questionable, more so now than ever before
So long as people continue to be honest about whether they will actually vote or not, there is no reason why our polls shouldn't be as accurate as those in France or the US. I expect that is the position right now.
The 2017 problem re-arises if large numbers of people return to being over-optimistic about their likelihood of turning out.
Generally speaking , the polls were in fact pretty accurate before the pollsters started to fiddle with the figures and adjust them . Take for example the last Comres poll . Published VI headline Con lead of 10% . Look though at the full data tables . Table 6 had almost the correct result a Con lead of just 1 % and then the pollsters got to work with their adjustments .
Yes, the raw data was better than the processed, something perhaps to be anticipated in a high turnout election.
It is hard to see a swift Tory recovery from a lame duck administration, continuing austerity and a Brexit that cannot satisfy because of incompatible preferences.
Stranger things have happened though, these are politically volatile times.
I think we're heading for an agreement on citizens' rights - this always seemed likely to be an early win, and it may lead to something of a false dawn about the talks - "not going to be as hard as we thought". Might even help May's ratings for a while...
As for McDonnell, he overdoes his rhetoric at times, but personally I think Governments need a tough figure in the top team - one can't live by idealism alone. The reason the programme was more or less costed wihout splurges on some obvious places (benefits being the obvious one) is I suspect largely down to him. He's made an effort to prepare as Shadow Chancellor, which opposition chancellors really usually don't. What he hasn't yet done is complete the transition from far-left campaigner to potential Chancellor, in a way that Corbyn has visibly done for the top job.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Just remind ourselves how accurate these pollsters were at the GE.
Survation were almost spot on, Panelbase understated Labour and overstated the Tories.
Why do you ask ?
Because the polls were crap in 205 they were crap in 2017. The trustworthiness of any poll is questionable, more so now than ever before
So long as people continue to be honest about whether they will actually vote or not, there is no reason why our polls shouldn't be as accurate as those in France or the US. I expect that is the position right now.
The 2017 problem re-arises if large numbers of people return to being over-optimistic about their likelihood of turning out.
Generally speaking , the polls were in fact pretty accurate before the pollsters started to fiddle with the figures and adjust them . Take for example the last Comres poll . Published VI headline Con lead of 10% . Look though at the full data tables . Table 6 had almost the correct result a Con lead of just 1 % and then the pollsters got to work with their adjustments .
Yes, the raw data was better than the processed, something perhaps to be anticipated in a high turnout election.
It is hard to see a swift Tory recovery from a lame duck administration, continuing austerity and a Brexit that cannot satisfy because of incompatible preferences.
Stranger things have happened though, these are politically volatile times.
Aren't they paid to make adjustments to get closer to the actual result rather than further away.
Any pollster who thought 18-24 turnout would be identical to 2015 was unfit for purpose.
Gosh, its quiet on here this morning. Its almost as if many of the usual posters are too depressed about the situation to chip in.
I'm still recovering from Eid, where my parents' friends tried to marry me off to at least 30 different women.
On topic, Mrs May is crap, like Gordon Brown, she should go
To be replaced by whom? She just won a general election, if the Tories replace her they have utter contempt for democracy.
WON. Total bollocks.
The ONLY reason for having the election was to boost majority in order, allegedly.to boost UK's negotiating position. What happened. She suffered net loss of seats and LOST her majority and at the same time her political credibility. Now we know she's rubbish at campaigning and frit of situations where she should come under pressure.
Just remind ourselves how accurate these pollsters were at the GE.
Survation were almost spot on, Panelbase understated Labour and overstated the Tories.
Why do you ask ?
Because the polls were crap in 205 they were crap in 2017. The trustworthiness of any poll is questionable, more so now than ever before
So long as people continue to be honest about whether they will actually vote or not, there is no reason why our polls shouldn't be as accurate as those in France or the US. I expect that is the position right now.
The 2017 problem re-arises if large numbers of people return to being over-optimistic about their likelihood of turning out.
Generally speaking , the polls were in fact pretty accurate before the pollsters started to fiddle with the figures and adjust them . Take for example the last Comres poll . Published VI headline Con lead of 10% . Look though at the full data tables . Table 6 had almost the correct result a Con lead of just 1 % and then the pollsters got to work with their adjustments .
Yes, the raw data was better than the processed, something perhaps to be anticipated in a high turnout election.
It is hard to see a swift Tory recovery from a lame duck administration, continuing austerity and a Brexit that cannot satisfy because of incompatible preferences.
Stranger things have happened though, these are politically volatile times.
Aren't they paid to make adjustments to get closer to the actual result rather than further away.
Any pollster who thought 18-24 turnout would be identical to 2015 was unfit for purpose.
Has Martin Kaboom Boon been sacked yet?
Most posters on PB scoffed at the idea of increased youth turnout before the election
Stick to the original manifesto, bring down the government at the first opportunity, and assuming you win the subsequent GE, govern basically on the manifesto. Along the Nordic lines, if anything, without frightening the horses too much.
Any financial hiccups can be attributed to Brexit. Use those five years to give the local branches more autonomy and democratically remove the stubborn class traitors. Your other task in the first five years is to commandeer the media.
The next manifesto can be more true Socialism with just a whiff of gunpowder, aided by a compliant media (fearlessly honest can be used a lot). Any crisis can be blamed on the class traitors. It's a bit early for show trials but that will come later.
I'm not totally serious, but if Jezza has never changed his views he'll know this from back in the day. Come on, Snowball, you can do it..
Just remind ourselves how accurate these pollsters were at the GE.
Survation were almost spot on, Panelbase understated Labour and overstated the Tories.
Why do you ask ?
Because the polls were crap in 205 they were crap in 2017. The trustworthiness of any poll is questionable, more so now than ever before
So long as people continue to be honest about whether they will actually vote or not, there is no reason why our polls shouldn't be as accurate as those in France or the US. I expect that is the position right now.
The 2017 problem re-arises if large numbers of people return to being over-optimistic about their likelihood of turning out.
Generally speaking , the polls were in fact pretty accurate before the pollsters started to fiddle with the figures and adjust them . Take for example the last Comres poll . Published VI headline Con lead of 10% . Look though at the full data tables . Table 6 had almost the correct result a Con lead of just 1 % and then the pollsters got to work with their adjustments .
Yes, the raw data was better than the processed, something perhaps to be anticipated in a high turnout election.
It is hard to see a swift Tory recovery from a lame duck administration, continuing austerity and a Brexit that cannot satisfy because of incompatible preferences.
Stranger things have happened though, these are politically volatile times.
Aren't they paid to make adjustments to get closer to the actual result rather than further away.
Any pollster who thought 18-24 turnout would be identical to 2015 was unfit for purpose.
Has Martin Kaboom Boon been sacked yet?
Ah. The wisdom of hindsight. If you'd have posted that before 2200 on June 8th it would have more credibility.
Gosh, its quiet on here this morning. Its almost as if many of the usual posters are too depressed about the situation to chip in.
I'm still recovering from Eid, where my parents' friends tried to marry me off to at least 30 different women.
On topic, Mrs May is crap, like Gordon Brown, she should go
To be replaced by whom? She just won a general election, if the Tories replace her they have utter contempt for democracy.
WON. Total bollocks.
The ONLY reason for having the election was to boost majority in order, allegedly.to boost UK's negotiating position. What happened. She suffered net loss of seats and LOST her majority and at the same time her political credibility. Now we know she's rubbish at campaigning and frit of situations where she should come under pressure.
Its hard to disagree with that. The *only* positive to come out of the GE for her is that she continues to be PM. Everything else has been a disaster for her and the Conservatives.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
It could easily happen.
Having said that, I'm far from convinced he actually wants the job, or at least that he wanted it before the GE. Now, having faced the adulating moronic masses at Glastonbury, he might be thinking otherwise.
I'm of the view that a Corbyn government is a certainty. I am not sure how it can be avoided.
Unfortunately those with memories of socialism in practice are passing away and we do not have enough students of history to compensate. This means that we have to go through a whole load of pain so the young can learn the reality of socialism. It should then protect us from another does for another 30 years or so but it may take that long to recover!
I think a Corbyn government is far from a certainty. I look at my own constituency - affluent Warwick & Leamington, which returned a Tory MP in 2010 and gave him a bigger majority in 2017 only to vote Labour on 8th June - and I struggle with the idea that it has suddenly embraced full-blooded socialism. What it did do in 2016, though, was vote to Remain in the EU. Once Brexit is done I just wonder what will happen.
Stick to the original manifesto, bring down the government at the first opportunity, and assuming you win the subsequent GE, govern basically on the manifesto. Along the Nordic lines, if anything, without frightening the horses too much.
Any financial hiccups can be attributed to Brexit. Use those five years to give the local branches more autonomy and democratically remove the stubborn class traitors. Your other task in the first five years is to commandeer the media.
The next manifesto can be more true Socialism with just a whiff of gunpowder, aided by a compliant media (fearlessly honest can be used a lot). Any crisis can be blamed on the class traitors. It's a bit early for show trials but that will come later.
I'm not totally serious, but if Jezza has never changed his views he'll know this from back in the day. Come on, Snowball, you can do it..
The pound seems to be rising this mornimg on the prospect of a DUP deal.
As far as Theresa May is concerned she is in a very poor place at present but I do not see her standing down yet, not do I see the party removing her for the time being.
The main demands for her to go are coming from those who oppose her anyway but if she achieves a DUP deal and goes on to secure EU citizens rights with deportation of criminals and retention of the health care for Brits in the EU she may well survive for quite a while.
However if she does resign during the summer I have no problem with her decision
I'm of the view that a Corbyn government is a certainty. I am not sure how it can be avoided.
Unfortunately those with memories of socialism in practice are passing away and we do not have enough students of history to compensate. This means that we have to go through a whole load of pain so the young can learn the reality of socialism. It should then protect us from another does for another 30 years or so but it may take that long to recover!
Against your argument is quite simply that many have experienced neo-liberalism, and found it wanting. Socialism came into being in the late 19th century as a reaction against the liberalist philosophy (nothing whatsoever to do with the Liberal Party). What too many forget, is that public opinion is like a pendulum. It may look as if it is stuck at one extreme of it's swing for a period of time, but, inexorably, gravity comes into play and it swings to the other side. So long as there is some one around to wind up the mechanism, clean, repair or in extremis, rebuild it, the pendulum will keep swinging.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
They're offensive to anyone who wants to avoid a similar tragedy occurring again. He's picking a sick and politically advantageous 'reason' for the tragedy before we have any information to back that up.
If this gains currency, then the real causes, when revealed by an inquiry, will get ignored. After all, the 'real' reasons have already been uncovered. And that means it'll be easy for any difficult conclusions from the inquiry to get forgotten about.
And something will happen again because the causal factors were not fixed. Whatever else happened that night, the causal factors were not simple.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
(And I must add: if the inquiry shows that evil Conservatives share some blame, I'll be the first to say there should be a reckoning. Just as I'll accept it if it says the Labour councils were at fault, or that no-one did anything wrong).
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
Stick to the original manifesto, bring down the government at the first opportunity, and assuming you win the subsequent GE, govern basically on the manifesto. Along the Nordic lines, if anything, without frightening the horses too much.
Any financial hiccups can be attributed to Brexit. Use those five years to give the local branches more autonomy and democratically remove the stubborn class traitors. Your other task in the first five years is to commandeer the media.
The next manifesto can be more true Socialism with just a whiff of gunpowder, aided by a compliant media (fearlessly honest can be used a lot). Any crisis can be blamed on the class traitors. It's a bit early for show trials but that will come later.
I'm not totally serious, but if Jezza has never changed his views he'll know this from back in the day. Come on, Snowball, you can do it..
"Your other task in the first five years is to commandeer the media." ...beaten by the Tories.
Gosh, its quiet on here this morning. Its almost as if many of the usual posters are too depressed about the situation to chip in.
Are you surprised David? All we have seen for the past two weeks is a procession of Tory-bashing threads, even from the likes of David Herdson (prescient though he might have been beforehand) as well as from TSE, such that this has driven most Tories away from the site, including yours truly. Much more of the same and I fear for the very future of PB.com. FWIW, on this rare visit, my own view is that the Tories are not yet necessarily finished in Government - the disastrous GE result was caused by one major factor .... Theresa May and the hopeless way in which she conducted the entire campaign. She desperately needs to go and soon. The next leader then has to first listen and then to speak to the people ..... something TMay conspicuously and consistently failed to do. It will then be a question of asking the electorate to decide between an imperfect Conservative party and the most left wing, Marxist party seen anywhere in Europe since WW2. Should the people decide to go with the latter, then so be it. I personally very much doubt they will.
Are you surprised David? All we have seen for the past two weeks is a procession of Tory-bashing threads, even from the likes of David Herdson (prescient though he might have been beforehand) as well as from TSE, such that this has driven most Tories away from the site, including yours truly. Much more of the same and I fear for the very future of PB.com.
It's politicalbetting.com, not Torycomfortpolling.com
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
Yes but McDonnell went too far
Yes, he probably did - the police are reportedly considering manslaughter charges, not murder charges.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
In up to five years time, when things may well be different....
As Mrs May has just experienced, five weeks is a VERY long time in politics....
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
From what I've read, McDonnell did indeed blame decisions "made by politicians over decades".
On another matter, I have been away for the weekend, and on my way into London on Sunday we drove past the Grenfell tower. It was only seeing it in person that one could really actually appreciate the enormity of the disaster. Its difficult to actually put it into words. Its stands there, a blackened mass , its just awful. If anyone cheapskate on materials a la Towering Inferno or dodged the specifications, they deserve to be prosecuted.
From the Westway it is most stark.
Subject to I suppose any number of considerations it made me wonder whether it ought not to be maintained as some kind of monument, such is its awful presence.
Pull it down and build something else, as would happen if the block had been privately owned. If a tower full of rich people had suffered the same fate, or this one been in Basingstoke rather than within sight of the homes of the West London chattering media class, interest would have waned after a day or two.
As for McDonnell - vile and disgusting creature. Suggesting that those involved had been neglected when the best part of £10 million had been spent refurbishing the building are ridiculous.
Today would be a good day for for JC to say that not only is he going to scrap Trident, but also that he will scrap (or preferably sell off)- the useless aircaft carriers that dont have any aircraft. And he should do it by saying that all of the money saved would be assigned to remaining armed forces who will be leaner and meaner - And also a good time to point out that UK Navy has more Admirals than ships.....
I’m not sure whether Cable as leader will be good or bad for the LD’s. He’s maybe yesterday’s man, possibly the sage in the corner, or of course, just maybe the authoritative wise old man to whom everyone can listen.
On what matters has Cable shown himself authoritative or wise?
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
Yes but McDonnell went too far
In your opinion. Which is, and I grant this may come as new information to you, not the perfect and irreducible truth.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
The BBC are reporting that McDonnell used the word "murdered". That word means that someone actively decided to kill those residents because murder is defined as "... the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another"
By using that word he appears to be saying that there was a deliberate policy to kill tower block residents. The implication is that somebody sat down and planned it that way.
So as far as I am concerned, he is either an uneducated buffoon, grossly insensitive or will clamber over anyone's grave to score a political point. None of them are commendable traits IMO
Assuming the grown up's have once again taken control of the Tory party (one can hope), they will not be anywhere near as stupid again in any future election campaign. If I was them, I'd play it long-ish with May, keeping her in place for at least a year, if not 2 to cover Brexit negotiations. If she recovers, fine, but assuming she doesn't, line up the best replacement.
Whilst this is going on, behind the scenes, echo Cameron's pre 2015 plan of testing to death with voters, propositions that kill the opposition off. The meme is with Labour at the moment so they can claim Grenfell was "murder" and get away with it for now, but it won't last for ever and they will over reach themselves.
The UK has had enough of big votes with 3 in the past 3 years. The Tories need to bed in and just do boringly efficient government whilst planning how to put the socialist crazy fire out.
Morning all. Looks the the DUP deal is all but done, but aside from buying the Tories some time in government it's hard to see an upside for them from it and a host of problems. Not least will be the outcry from the regions and nations at not getting extra cash, especially if austerity isn't visibly ended immediately. The bigger story is of course cladgate. Some people will have got very wealthy off the back of the cladding applied and there will be an enormous amount of anger which will have some weird and probably unpredictable effects on politics. Not least to consider though is that it's housing which in the main is social and lived in by the poorer in society. Quite extraordinary that such an issue should loom large at the same time as a spike in support for hard left political thought. My initial thought is voting intention will move away from competence and economic probity towards who is on my side. Lastly, £10 an hour for 16 to 17 year olds is an awful policy that would completely kill off work experience in jobs for 6th form students and harm youth unemployment figures.
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
The BBC are reporting that McDonnell used the word "murdered". That word means that someone actively decided to kill those residents because murder is defined as "... the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another"
By using that word he appears to be saying that there was a deliberate policy to kill tower block residents. The implication is that somebody sat down and planned it that way.
So as far as I am concerned, he is either an uneducated buffoon, grossly insensitive or will clamber over anyone's grave to score a political point. None of them are commendable traits IMO
Same bloke who wanted non IRA supporters to be knee capped. No surprise really.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
It doesn't actually matter what is going on in his head - just what he's saying. He is (in an un-nuanced way) stating the "reason" for this appalling disaster.
He may have a more nuanced view of this, or he may not - but that's not the public impression that he is giving.
If he had said "as the inquiry proceeds, we must ensure that the impact of the political decisions are not lost amongst the commercial and complex regulatory detail" that would be one thing, but, as far as I know, he didn't.
As for McDonnell - vile and disgusting creature. Suggesting that those involved had been neglected when the best part of £10 million had been spent refurbishing the building are ridiculous.
I don't think he did say they had been "neglected". He said they were "murdered by political decisions that were taken over recent decades". He is saying that because of those politicial decisions, the refurbishment proved fatal.
Of course, it's stupid to use the word "murdered". But for the rest of it, something has clearly gone very badly wrong indeed. Why would anyone assume political decisions weren't involved?
You do seem to be able to provide a balanced view and are the acceptable face of the left. However, McDonnell needs to be reigned in as his comments, together with his background, are offensive.
Offensive to whom? The acceptable ambit of political discussion doesn't end where your feelings start.
His comments are offensive
Most of the comments posted here are offensive to someone or other.
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
The BBC are reporting that McDonnell used the word "murdered". That word means that someone actively decided to kill those residents because murder is defined as "... the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another"
By using that word he appears to be saying that there was a deliberate policy to kill tower block residents. The implication is that somebody sat down and planned it that way.
So as far as I am concerned, he is either an uneducated buffoon, grossly insensitive or will clamber over anyone's grave to score a political point. None of them are commendable traits IMO
McDonnell has probably spent so much time in the company of terrorist murderers, he assumes everyone shares those traits.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
The assumption is that there will be an election, I see no reason why that will occur
Morning all. Looks the the DUP deal is all but done, but aside from buying the Tories some time in government it's hard to see an upside for them from it and a host of problems. Not least will be the outcry from the regions and nations at not getting extra cash, especially if austerity isn't visibly ended immediately. The bigger story is of course cladgate. Some people will have got very wealthy off the back of the cladding applied and there will be an enormous amount of anger which will have some weird and probably unpredictable effects on politics. Not least to consider though is that it's housing which in the main is social and lived in by the poorer in society. Quite extraordinary that such an issue should loom large at the same time as a spike in support for hard left political thought. My initial thought is voting intention will move away from competence and economic probity towards who is on my side. Lastly, £10 an hour for 16 to 17 year olds is an awful policy that would completely kill off work experience in jobs for 6th form students and harm youth unemployment figures.
Cladgate covers more than just council tower blocks, Premier Inn's have issues with some of their buildings and if you look at some of RIBA's comments, under Labour's watch in the 2000's many counter balancing rules on building safety standards were changed which hasn't helped (Probably any govt would have done the same, but given the 2008 crash was partly due to Brown's changes to city regulation against Tory advice, you never know).
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
In up to five years time, when things may well be different....
As Mrs May has just experienced, five weeks is a VERY long time in politics....
Time is always a factor and lots of things can happen. "Expect the unexpected" as the HHGTTG used to say.
But time also allows the piling up of bad press and various c*ck-ups which, historically, always seems to affect govts more than oppositions.
As for McDonnell - vile and disgusting creature. Suggesting that those involved had been neglected when the best part of £10 million had been spent refurbishing the building are ridiculous.
I don't think he did say they had been "neglected". He said they were "murdered by political decisions that were taken over recent decades". He is saying that because of those politicial decisions, the refurbishment proved fatal.
Of course, it's stupid to use the word "murdered". But for the rest of it, something has clearly gone very badly wrong indeed. Why would anyone assume political decisions weren't involved?
I have just watched his speech. He seems to make a fair point albeit using inflammatory language. As you say, he is saying that a series of rotten decisions directly caused the death of these people. He then goes on to list those decisions.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
The assumption is that there will be an election, I see no reason why that will occur
Because no govt has a mandate to govern for more than five years. That is our law. There WILL be an election no later than June 2022.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
It doesn't actually matter what is going on in his head - just what he's saying. He is (in an un-nuanced way) stating the "reason" for this appalling disaster.
Of course it matters what's going on in his head, because the accusation I was replying to is that he was "playing sick politics with the deaths".
He was stupid to use the word "murdered", and his attribution of blame may indeed prove premature. But in asserting that attribution is wrong, some people here are making their own premature assumptions.
Or do they have their own explanation for what has gone so dreadfully wrong?
She won... Most votes, most seats. By any reasonable criterion, she won the election. Born again Osborneites and bitter Lib Dems might think otherwise, but she won.
More exactly, Mr Quidder, she won more seats than any other single party. But she most certainly did not win most of the votes.
Interesting, in passing, that you are still talking about "the Theresa May Party", rather than the Conservative Party. That particular project has been tried and tested, and failed the test totally.
It sticks in my craw to have people who withstood years of murderous assaults being patronised and sneered at by their persecutors, particularly the Sinn Fein leadership that has cynically reinvented itself as ‘progressive’.
And as a feminist from my teens, I was particularly irritated on Saturday by female activists who wouldn’t dream of criticising Islamic attitudes to women for fear of being called ‘racist’, marching through London to attack a political party of which they hadn’t heard until five minutes ago when it had the temerity to contemplate a deal with the wicked Conservative government.
I suspect no further action will be taken. A few years ago Maldonado side-swiped Hamilton in practice at Spa. Higher speed, damage done, but only practice. I think no action was taken at all (maybe a few points on his licence, which is very minor). Given the tightness of the title contest, punishing Vettel again after he's already had a penalty (10s stop and go) would be a courageous decision.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He said it should not be a party political matter
Shouldn't maybe but will. Everything is. McDonnell made what is obviously a very strong statement but he's just following what will now be the playbook. It's the wedge into them and us, them being those that did not outwardly suffer from 2008 and financial retrenchment - the wealthy, the business owners, the banks, the establishment, us being the common clay. Tories, Toryism etc are going to be very very unpopular for a while and blamed for everything unfair, rotten and inequitable in the country. Lightning rod for greed and there's a hell of a storm coming.
Today would be a good day for for JC to say that not only is he going to scrap Trident, but also that he will scrap (or preferably sell off)- the useless aircaft carriers that dont have any aircraft. And he should do it by saying that all of the money saved would be assigned to remaining armed forces who will be leaner and meaner - And also a good time to point out that UK Navy has more Admirals than ships.....
Gosh, its quiet on here this morning. Its almost as if many of the usual posters are too depressed about the situation to chip in.
Are you surprised David? All we have seen for the past two weeks is a procession of Tory-bashing threads, even from the likes of David Herdson (prescient though he might have been beforehand) as well as from TSE, such that this has driven most Tories away from the site, including yours truly. Much more of the same and I fear for the very future of PB.com. FWIW, on this rare visit, my own view is that the Tories are not yet necessarily finished in Government - the disastrous GE result was caused by one major factor .... Theresa May and the hopeless way in which she conducted the entire campaign. She desperately needs to go and soon. The next leader then has to first listen and then to speak to the people ..... something TMay conspicuously and consistently failed to do. It will then be a question of asking the electorate to decide between an imperfect Conservative party and the most left wing, Marxist party seen anywhere in Europe since WW2. Should the people decide to go with the latter, then so be it. I personally very much doubt they will.
Dry your eyes. The purpose of the site is not to offer psephological teddy bears to the Tory bedwetters who dominate the site. David H and TSE are both Conservative Party members – that they are capable of independent and challenging thought is a credit to both of them.
I’m not sure whether Cable as leader will be good or bad for the LD’s. He’s maybe yesterday’s man, possibly the sage in the corner, or of course, just maybe the authoritative wise old man to whom everyone can listen.
On what matters has Cable shown himself authoritative or wise?
He predicted all six of the last two one recessions.....
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
It doesn't actually matter what is going on in his head - just what he's saying. He is (in an un-nuanced way) stating the "reason" for this appalling disaster.
Of course it matters what's going on in his head, because the accusation I was replying to is that he was "playing sick politics with the deaths".
He was stupid to use the word "murdered", and his attribution of blame may indeed prove premature. But in asserting that attribution is wrong, some people here are making their own premature assumptions.
Or do they have their own explanation for what has gone so dreadfully wrong?
Maybe that should be "he is, intentionally or not, playing politics with other people's lives. If intentional, that is a disgrace, if unintentional, then he demonstrates that he fails to understand the consequences of his public utterances now that he is shadow chancellor."
As to whether his attribution of blame is (in part) right or (in part) wrong - we will find out. But he is not just an "ordinary person" any more. Not even an "ordinary back-bencher".
Today would be a good day for for JC to say that not only is he going to scrap Trident, but also that he will scrap (or preferably sell off)- the useless aircaft carriers that dont have any aircraft. And he should do it by saying that all of the money saved would be assigned to remaining armed forces who will be leaner and meaner - And also a good time to point out that UK Navy has more Admirals than ships.....
She won... Most votes, most seats. By any reasonable criterion, she won the election. Born again Osborneites and bitter Lib Dems might think otherwise, but she won.
But she most certainly did not win most of the votes.
'Most votes' can mean 'more votes than anyone else' (which is true) as well as "most of the votes", which would be 50% +1
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
The assumption is that there will be an election, I see no reason why that will occur
Because no govt has a mandate to govern for more than five years. That is our law. There WILL be an election no later than June 2022.
That is my point, I see no reason why there'll be an election before 2022, I find it highly unlikely that Corbyn would win then.
Are you surprised David? All we have seen for the past two weeks is a procession of Tory-bashing threads, even from the likes of David Herdson (prescient though he might have been beforehand) as well as from TSE, such that this has driven most Tories away from the site, including yours truly. Much more of the same and I fear for the very future of PB.com.
It's politicalbetting.com, not Torycomfortpolling.com
Thanks, will look into registering the site name :-)
Today would be a good day for for JC to say that not only is he going to scrap Trident, but also that he will scrap (or preferably sell off)- the useless aircaft carriers that dont have any aircraft. And he should do it by saying that all of the money saved would be assigned to remaining armed forces who will be leaner and meaner - And also a good time to point out that UK Navy has more Admirals than ships.....
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He said it should not be a party political matter
Well, on that view, whether it becomes a "party political matter" would depend on how political decisions are deemed to have influenced those building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes, and whether one party turned out to be more responsible than another.
Isn't it just as premature to assume that won't be the case, as to assume it will? But, as ever here, views will be judged predominantly on which side of the political contest they favour.
She won... Most votes, most seats. By any reasonable criterion, she won the election. Born again Osborneites and bitter Lib Dems might think otherwise, but she won.
But she most certainly did not win most of the votes.
'Most votes' can mean 'more votes than anyone else' (which is true) as well as "most of the votes", which would be 50% +1
Er no.
Most of the votes means most of the votes.
More votes than anyone else means more votes than anyone else.
The one thing the Tories need to do is divorce themselves from the thought that JC is terrible and shouldn't inspire people to the fact that he clearly is inspiring people and start finding their own message of inspiration.
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
The assumption is that there will be an election, I see no reason why that will occur
Because no govt has a mandate to govern for more than five years. That is our law. There WILL be an election no later than June 2022.
That is my point, I see no reason why there'll be an election before 2022, I find it highly unlikely that Corbyn would win then.
I agree. Although with two caveats: a) sadly death may intervene and reduce the majority to something unworkable via by-elections. It is unlikely there will be enough lost by-elections in five years to reduce things too far, but not impossible. b) There is talk in Tory circles about going to country in 2019 after a Brexit deal has been sealed.
Obviously b wont happen if they are still behind in the polls.
All in all, imho it is quite likely that this DUP-Tory government will run until 2022.
Today would be a good day for for JC to say that not only is he going to scrap Trident, but also that he will scrap (or preferably sell off)- the useless aircaft carriers that dont have any aircraft. And he should do it by saying that all of the money saved would be assigned to remaining armed forces who will be leaner and meaner - And also a good time to point out that UK Navy has more Admirals than ships.....
The one thing the Tories need to do is divorce themselves from the thought that JC is terrible and shouldn't inspire people to the fact that he clearly is inspiring people and start finding their own message of inspiration.
She won... Most votes, most seats. By any reasonable criterion, she won the election. Born again Osborneites and bitter Lib Dems might think otherwise, but she won.
But she most certainly did not win most of the votes.
'Most votes' can mean 'more votes than anyone else' (which is true) as well as "most of the votes", which would be 50% +1
Er no.
Most of the votes means most of the votes.
More votes than anyone else means more votes than anyone else.
But 'Most votes' can mean either. Otherwise 'most seats' would also be wrong.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He said it should not be a party political matter
Well, on that view, whether it becomes a "party political matter" would depend on how political decisions are deemed to have influenced those building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes, and whether one party turned out to be more responsible than another.
Isn't it just as premature to assume that won't be the case, as to assume it will? But, as ever here, views will be judged predominantly on which side of the political contest they favour.
Everything is premature - wisdom suggests waiting for the preliminary report is the best course to take
I’m not sure whether Cable as leader will be good or bad for the LD’s. He’s maybe yesterday’s man, possibly the sage in the corner, or of course, just maybe the authoritative wise old man to whom everyone can listen.
On what matters has Cable shown himself authoritative or wise?
He predicted all six of the last two one recessions.....
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He said it should not be a party political matter
Well, on that view, whether it becomes a "party political matter" would depend on how political decisions are deemed to have influenced those building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes, and whether one party turned out to be more responsible than another.
Isn't it just as premature to assume that won't be the case, as to assume it will? But, as ever here, views will be judged predominantly on which side of the political contest they favour.
Everything is premature - wisdom suggests waiting for the preliminary report is the best course to take
In that case you were rather unwise to post the premature opinions of your expert!
McD: "Is democracy working? It didn’t work if you were a family living on the 20th floor of Grenfell Tower."
It also didn't work, John, if your name is Coyne and you dared to run against the ultimate Labour left fixer - Red Len. He is currently fighting to save his job in the union.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
And you're accusing him of "making it more likely that other will die", on the basis of sheer speculation about what's going on in his head. Marvellous.
The building problem has gone through Labour, Tory and Tory-Lib Dem coalition governments; Labour and Tory councils. It shouldn't be party political.
Interestingly an international fire safe expert on 5live early this morning said that neither the Prime Minister or any other previous Prime Minister bears any responsibility for the Grenfell fire, more that it was a collective failure of building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes.
He said it should not be a party political matter
Well, on that view, whether it becomes a "party political matter" would depend on how political decisions are deemed to have influenced those building, surveying, and fire inspection regimes, and whether one party turned out to be more responsible than another.
Isn't it just as premature to assume that won't be the case, as to assume it will? But, as ever here, views will be judged predominantly on which side of the political contest they favour.
Everything is premature - wisdom suggests waiting for the preliminary report is the best course to take
In that case you were rather unwise to post the premature opinions of your expert!
Not at all as he was endorsing the view it should not be political
Extraordinary how so many people on here are saying Corbyn as next PM is inevitable.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
1. Historically, in the UK, govts lose elections rather than oppositions winning them.
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
The assumption is that there will be an election, I see no reason why that will occur
Because no govt has a mandate to govern for more than five years. That is our law. There WILL be an election no later than June 2022.
But not necessarily much earlier - and - if the Conservatives have any sense (which I accept isn't a given) - certainly not in the 6 months that Corbyn seems to think is likely.....
Comments
McDonnell attempts to make sick political capital (and I'm guessing incorrectly) about the death of at least 79 people, and it's just overdone rhetoric?
It is hard to see a swift Tory recovery from a lame duck administration, continuing austerity and a Brexit that cannot satisfy because of incompatible preferences.
Stranger things have happened though, these are politically volatile times.
Any pollster who thought 18-24 turnout would be identical to 2015 was unfit for purpose.
Has Martin Kaboom Boon been sacked yet?
The ONLY reason for having the election was to boost majority in order, allegedly.to boost UK's negotiating position. What happened. She suffered net loss of seats and LOST her majority and at the same time her political credibility. Now we know she's rubbish at campaigning and frit of situations where she should come under pressure.
If it were up to me, she should be replaced by Johnny Mercer.
If I were a Trot. I would use this cunning plan.
Stick to the original manifesto, bring down the government at the first opportunity, and assuming you win the subsequent GE, govern basically on the manifesto. Along the Nordic lines, if anything, without frightening the horses too much.
Any financial hiccups can be attributed to Brexit. Use those five years to give the local branches more autonomy and democratically remove the stubborn class traitors. Your other task in the first five years is to commandeer the media.
The next manifesto can be more true Socialism with just a whiff of gunpowder, aided by a compliant media (fearlessly honest can be used a lot). Any crisis can be blamed on the class traitors. It's a bit early for show trials but that will come later.
I'm not totally serious, but if Jezza has never changed his views he'll know this from back in the day. Come on, Snowball, you can do it..
You don't get to turn in our final exam after the answers have been published.
I'd like somebody to explain the rational process behind it, because its not going to happen.
Born again Osborneites and bitter Lib Dems might think otherwise, but she won.
Having said that, I'm far from convinced he actually wants the job, or at least that he wanted it before the GE. Now, having faced the adulating moronic masses at Glastonbury, he might be thinking otherwise.
As far as Theresa May is concerned she is in a very poor place at present but I do not see her standing down yet, not do I see the party removing her for the time being.
The main demands for her to go are coming from those who oppose her anyway but if she achieves a DUP deal and goes on to secure EU citizens rights with deportation of criminals and retention of the health care for Brits in the EU she may well survive for quite a while.
However if she does resign during the summer I have no problem with her decision
We really are in trouble
Paste the address of the article into google, click the little green triangle underneath the search result and load the cached page.
for freeee
2. The current govt is not winning voters over and seems to be losing ground
3. We only have one opposition party big enough to form a govt.
4. The leader of the winning party usually gets to be PM
1 and 2 above implies that the current govt would lose an election. If they lose then 3 implies that Labour will win and then 4 implies that JC will be PM
If this gains currency, then the real causes, when revealed by an inquiry, will get ignored. After all, the 'real' reasons have already been uncovered. And that means it'll be easy for any difficult conclusions from the inquiry to get forgotten about.
And something will happen again because the causal factors were not fixed. Whatever else happened that night, the causal factors were not simple.
He's playing sick politics with the deaths, and making it more likely that other will die. That's offensive.
(And I must add: if the inquiry shows that evil Conservatives share some blame, I'll be the first to say there should be a reckoning. Just as I'll accept it if it says the Labour councils were at fault, or that no-one did anything wrong).
Maybe I've missed some information, but we seem to be in a situation where every single one of the blocks tested has been found to contain unsafe materials, which the government had previously indicated were currently banned in this country.
In the context of at least 79 people having died, expect people to make hard-hitting comments.
...beaten by the Tories.
FWIW, on this rare visit, my own view is that the Tories are not yet necessarily finished in Government - the disastrous GE result was caused by one major factor .... Theresa May and the hopeless way in which she conducted the entire campaign. She desperately needs to go and soon. The next leader then has to first listen and then to speak to the people ..... something TMay conspicuously and consistently failed to do. It will then be a question of asking the electorate to decide between an imperfect Conservative party and the most left wing, Marxist party seen anywhere in Europe since WW2. Should the people decide to go with the latter, then so be it. I personally very much doubt they will.
As Mrs May has just experienced, five weeks is a VERY long time in politics....
As for McDonnell - vile and disgusting creature. Suggesting that those involved had been neglected when the best part of £10 million had been spent refurbishing the building are ridiculous.
A little something for the Corbynista to choke on their lattes:
https://twitter.com/iamhamesh/status/879089101407956992
By using that word he appears to be saying that there was a deliberate policy to kill tower block residents. The implication is that somebody sat down and planned it that way.
So as far as I am concerned, he is either an uneducated buffoon, grossly insensitive or will clamber over anyone's grave to score a political point. None of them are commendable traits IMO
If I was them, I'd play it long-ish with May, keeping her in place for at least a year, if not 2 to cover Brexit negotiations. If she recovers, fine, but assuming she doesn't, line up the best replacement.
Whilst this is going on, behind the scenes, echo Cameron's pre 2015 plan of testing to death with voters, propositions that kill the opposition off. The meme is with Labour at the moment so they can claim Grenfell was "murder" and get away with it for now, but it won't last for ever and they will over reach themselves.
The UK has had enough of big votes with 3 in the past 3 years. The Tories need to bed in and just do boringly efficient government whilst planning how to put the socialist crazy fire out.
The bigger story is of course cladgate. Some people will have got very wealthy off the back of the cladding applied and there will be an enormous amount of anger which will have some weird and probably unpredictable effects on politics. Not least to consider though is that it's housing which in the main is social and lived in by the poorer in society. Quite extraordinary that such an issue should loom large at the same time as a spike in support for hard left political thought.
My initial thought is voting intention will move away from competence and economic probity towards who is on my side.
Lastly, £10 an hour for 16 to 17 year olds is an awful policy that would completely kill off work experience in jobs for 6th form students and harm youth unemployment figures.
Vettel is an effing [moderated] who should have been black flagged and banned for 12 races.
He said it should not be a party political matter
He may have a more nuanced view of this, or he may not - but that's not the public impression that he is giving.
If he had said "as the inquiry proceeds, we must ensure that the impact of the political decisions are not lost amongst the commercial and complex regulatory detail" that would be one thing, but, as far as I know, he didn't.
Of course, it's stupid to use the word "murdered". But for the rest of it, something has clearly gone very badly wrong indeed. Why would anyone assume political decisions weren't involved?
But time also allows the piling up of bad press and various c*ck-ups which, historically, always seems to affect govts more than oppositions.
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/879254567271247873
He was stupid to use the word "murdered", and his attribution of blame may indeed prove premature. But in asserting that attribution is wrong, some people here are making their own premature assumptions.
Or do they have their own explanation for what has gone so dreadfully wrong?
Interesting, in passing, that you are still talking about "the Theresa May Party", rather than the Conservative Party. That particular project has been tried and tested, and failed the test totally.
And as a feminist from my teens, I was particularly irritated on Saturday by female activists who wouldn’t dream of criticising Islamic attitudes to women for fear of being called ‘racist’, marching through London to attack a political party of which they hadn’t heard until five minutes ago when it had the temerity to contemplate a deal with the wicked Conservative government.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ruth-dudley-edwards/ruth-dudley-edwards-jeremy-corbyn-and-antidup-stripper-did-a-fantastic-job-in-livening-up-my-saturday-35864228.html
I suspect no further action will be taken. A few years ago Maldonado side-swiped Hamilton in practice at Spa. Higher speed, damage done, but only practice. I think no action was taken at all (maybe a few points on his licence, which is very minor). Given the tightness of the title contest, punishing Vettel again after he's already had a penalty (10s stop and go) would be a courageous decision.
Tories, Toryism etc are going to be very very unpopular for a while and blamed for everything unfair, rotten and inequitable in the country. Lightning rod for greed and there's a hell of a storm coming.
As to whether his attribution of blame is (in part) right or (in part) wrong - we will find out. But he is not just an "ordinary person" any more. Not even an "ordinary back-bencher".
Isn't it just as premature to assume that won't be the case, as to assume it will? But, as ever here, views will be judged predominantly on which side of the political contest they favour.
Most of the votes means most of the votes.
More votes than anyone else means more votes than anyone else.
Obviously b wont happen if they are still behind in the polls.
All in all, imho it is quite likely that this DUP-Tory government will run until 2022.
Worthy Farm will no doubt have special dispensation from any Mugabe style land seizures.
It also didn't work, John, if your name is Coyne and you dared to run against the ultimate Labour left fixer - Red Len. He is currently fighting to save his job in the union.