Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We need to talk about Brandon Lewis

24

Comments

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I was just looking at the list of 92 seats who have switched from leave to remain. I can't help wondering if this is the Lexiters giving up on their long held views? These guys have been opposing the EU for longer than anyone and I thought that they would be the last ones to turn. Dennis Skinner is pretty much the archetype.

    Nobody has been talking about these guys much. They don't fit in with the liberal end of the left wing spectrum much, tending to be very white and quite conservative in many ways. And they certainly aren't Tories - they've got a world view that has almost no contact points with free market liberalism. They just sit there with nobody to vote for until by a fluke a referendum on a subject they are actually interested in turns up.

    But it must be pretty galling for them. They won't like any of the flavours of Brexit on offer. They sure won't like the company they are now keeping. And they really won't like the idea of becoming more dependant on Trump's America.

    I wonder if they'd switch to supporting the EU if that was the official Labour Party line? If so, the chances of Brexit happening and not being reversed become even more precariously dependant on the electoral fortunes of the Conservative Party.

    There are some very interesting movements when you drill down into the figures. There are actually some small swings towards Brexit in traditional Tory shires seats which flatter the overall numbers. My suspicion is that there is a small-c conservative tendency to think that Brexit is just something we have to get on with, but that would evaporate if the question were put back to the people for real.

    Elsewhere some of the most Brexity seats have seen big swings to Remain. Thurrock was 70% Brexit in 2016 and now only 58%.

    https://donate.hopenothate.org.uk/page/content/britain-brexit-changing-minds/
    The likes of Thurrock were concerned about immigration most of all, they would just about accept a work permits system but really wanted a points system and some would even slam the door shut altogether
    Well they're swinging significantly to Remain now...
    58% Leave 42% Remain is not 'significantly Remain' it is comfortably more Leave even than the UK as a whole voted Leave in 2016.


    Plus this poll is on a similar Remain margin nationally as the final 2016 EU referendum polls just before the UK as a whole voted Leave
    Moving from a 40% advantage for Leave to a 16% advantage for Leave is a big movement and highlights the increasing fragility of the Leave vote.
  • blueblueblueblue Posts: 875
    rcs1000 said:

    blueblue said:

    Does anyone seriously doubt that May would have won her elusive landslide (or at least a majority) if she'd campaigned on the populist issues of integration and freedom of speech instead of the dementia tax and no change?

    He's got his flaws, but once Brexit is done and May is out - bring on Boris.

    You know, though, the dementia tax was really important.

    We, as a society are getting older. Our birth rate has been below replacement levels for 30 years.

    We have to make some really difficult decisions about how we afford to pay for free healthcare.

    Back in the 1980s and 1990s, the UK made some incredibly important decisions. Tax incentives were put in place to encourage saving, even at the expense of short term damage to the economy via suppression of consumption.

    In the last few years, we've followed the principle of "way hey!, let's drive consumption higher through encouraging consumer spending, even at the expense of hammering our current account".

    The infantalisation of debate is shocking. Yeah, let's talk about burquas and whether we should - wink wink - ban them. Why bother solving any real problems, because the next lot will probably get the credit anyway.
    I love meaty policy questions as much as the next wonk. But, frankly, at the moment the stakes involved in elections are much higher than that. And how devastating for all areas of Government policy-making - not just Brexit - has the failure to win a majority in GE2017 been?

    Win the damned election first, THEN use your honeymoon and increased political capital to make difficult policy decisions.
  • [runs diagnostic on Tebbit Chip...]

    England just two wickets away from victory!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    viewcode said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    The whole burka thing has played into Boris's hands. I would not be surprised if he's even more popular than before. Straight out of Trump's playbook. Good for him.

    Yay. Let's go banning things we don't like because it garners a few votes
    Boris didn't call for a ban.
    However his father, sister and allies did almost immediately.
    Blimey, have you followed the Boris family saga. No way on earth does Boris get to tell his sister what to write!
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    [Tory Peer Lord] Cooper said: “The rottenness of Boris Johnson goes deeper even than his casual racism and his equally casual courting of fascism. He will advocate literally anything to play to the crowd of the moment. His career is a saga of moral emptiness and lies; pathetic, weak and needy; the opposite of strong.”

    Islam is not a race.
    So what word would you use? "Sectarian"? "Theophobic"?
    And anyway races are not really races either - the concept is very 19th century and shouldn't really have survived the disovery of what dna is and how it is distributed , and racism is not about race, even if they were. Racists hate, for example, "Pakis" which is a nationality and "niggers" which is a wide range of tones of skin colour and an amazing diversity of genetically distinct groupings. Given the overwhelming mapability of Islam to a certain number of nationalities and skin colours I have no problem at all identifying Johnson's problem as racism. "I hate Muzzies" is not in any interesting way different from "I hate Pakis".
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited August 2018
    Interestingly of the top 10 Labour target seats currently held by the Tories Corbyn needs to deprive the Tories of to stop them getting enough seats to do a deal with the DUP again in 2022, 5 of them Hastings, Thurrock, Preseli Pembrokeshire, Norwich North, Stoke on Trent South would still vote Leave even on this 'Best for Britain' poll


    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    https://donate.hopenothate.org.uk/page/content/britain-brexit-changing-minds/
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited August 2018
    Heh. #8 Ashwin is now India's top scorer in both innings. Fingers crossed Jimmy gets his 10th wicket in the match he got his hundredth at Lords! Oh well. What an absolute thumping that was.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,044
    Are the US cultural wars about to come to UK in a big way?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    Are the US cultural wars about to come to UK in a big way?
    I read it the other way - that trying to apply US culture wars to existing UK political fault lines is bound to fall flat, and that a pro-Remain but non-PC candidate could clean up.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    While of the top 10 Tory target seats currently held by Labour the Tories need to win for an overall majority in 2022, a majority of them, Dudley North, Newcastle Under Lyme, Crewe and Nantwich, Barrow and Furness, Ashfield and Bishop Auckland would also still vote Leave even on the 'Best for Britain' poll



    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

    https://donate.hopenothate.org.uk/page/content/britain-brexit-changing-minds/
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    [Tory Peer Lord] Cooper said: “The rottenness of Boris Johnson goes deeper even than his casual racism and his equally casual courting of fascism. He will advocate literally anything to play to the crowd of the moment. His career is a saga of moral emptiness and lies; pathetic, weak and needy; the opposite of strong.”

    Islam is not a race.
    So what word would you use? "Sectarian"? "Theophobic"?
    And anyway races are not really races either - the concept is very 19th century and shouldn't really have survived the disovery of what dna is and how it is distributed , and racism is not about race, even if they were. Racists hate, for example, "Pakis" which is a nationality and "niggers" which is a wide range of tones of skin colour and an amazing diversity of genetically distinct groupings. Given the overwhelming mapability of Islam to a certain number of nationalities and skin colours I have no problem at all identifying Johnson's problem as racism. "I hate Muzzies" is not in any interesting way different from "I hate Pakis".
    If anyone wants an illustration of how artifical the construct of race is and how vacuous and intellectually dishonest scientific racism is then the journey of American Irish from non-white to 'white' is a perfect example. In the mid 1800s in the USA the "Hiberno Iberian" was, barring skin tone, scientifically indistinguishable from the average negro.

    150 years later and the idea that the Irish were ever non-White is so laughable that people refuse to believe it was so.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either.

    (Although if I, as a newspaper publisher don't want to take an advert - for whatever reason - that is my concern. I shouldn't be obliged to carry something promoting gay marriage, scientology, or French cheese. It's my newspaper, and I'll starve if I want to.)
    They should be allowed to wear what they want and to be ridiculed for so doing if people wish to ridicule them.
    I mean if I decided to live up to my Nudistani heritage and pluck up the courage to walk around stark raving naked, wouldn't I expect to be ridiculed to infinity and beyond?
    It depends what you mean by ridiculous. I expect you wear trousers. Why is it not ridiculous that you choose to go around with your buttocks and penis concealed from us, but ridiculous for some people to conceal parts of their faces? Why are beards and sunglasses ok if burqas are not? Why if you are a clothing-ridiculer are the Vatican guards, the soldiers at Buckingham palace and Jacob Rees Mogg not on your target list?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited August 2018
    Remember "Identity Politics" is code for non-White-mainstream groups speaking back.

    Anyway, LOL at the Telegraph column writer complaining about his voice being curtailed. LOL hard.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Ishmael_Z said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either.

    (Although if I, as a newspaper publisher don't want to take an advert - for whatever reason - that is my concern. I shouldn't be obliged to carry something promoting gay marriage, scientology, or French cheese. It's my newspaper, and I'll starve if I want to.)
    They should be allowed to wear what they want and to be ridiculed for so doing if people wish to ridicule them.
    I mean if I decided to live up to my Nudistani heritage and pluck up the courage to walk around stark raving naked, wouldn't I expect to be ridiculed to infinity and beyond?
    It depends what you mean by ridiculous. I expect you wear trousers. Why is it not ridiculous that you choose to go around with your buttocks and penis concealed from us, but ridiculous for some people to conceal parts of their faces? Why are beards and sunglasses ok if burqas are not? Why if you are a clothing-ridiculer are the Vatican guards, the soldiers at Buckingham palace and Jacob Rees Mogg not on your target list?
    +1

    It's not clear to me why people think "I don't like the burka" or "it makes me feel uncomfortable" is relevant to a debate about whether it should be banned. I think the burka looks bloody silly, but I also think those blokes who are covered head to toe in tattoos look silly, as do women who disfigure their faces with botox and fillers and whatnot. In an ideal world, I would rather people didn't do any of those things; but I don't have the right to try to enforce my ideal world on other people. If I feel 'uncomfortable' by what they look like, then that's my issue to deal with.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237

    Are the US cultural wars about to come to UK in a big way?
    They already have.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237

    viewcode said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    The whole burka thing has played into Boris's hands. I would not be surprised if he's even more popular than before. Straight out of Trump's playbook. Good for him.

    Yay. Let's go banning things we don't like because it garners a few votes
    Boris didn't call for a ban.
    However his father, sister and allies did almost immediately.
    Blimey, have you followed the Boris family saga. No way on earth does Boris get to tell his sister what to write!
    "You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
    thank God! the British journalist.

    But, seeing what the man will do
    unbribed, there's no occasion to..."

    https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Humbert_Wolfe
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Alistair, pish.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics

    Identity politics are political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify. Identity politics includes the ways in which people's politics are shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely correlated social organizations. Examples include social organizations based on age, religion, social class or caste, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party affiliation, sexual orientation, settlement, urban and rural habitation, and veteran status.
    *

    It's about people identifying, for example, as black, then claiming the right to money from white people (as Michael Dyson did in a debate against Fry and Peterson). It's a wizard wheeze when you've got guilty white middle class people who don't mind if Lammy comes out with tosh like that below, but turns out not to be very clever when white people suddenly start identifying as white and a backlash starts.

    Almost as if we should treat people as individuals and judge them on the content of their character rather than the colour of their skin. Identity politics is rancid.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1027522656994775040
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited August 2018

    Mr. Alistair, pish.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics

    Identity politics are political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify. Identity politics includes the ways in which people's politics are shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely correlated social organizations. Examples include social organizations based on age, religion, social class or caste, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party affiliation, sexual orientation, settlement, urban and rural habitation, and veteran status.
    *

    It's about people identifying, for example, as black, then claiming the right to money from white people (as Michael Dyson did in a debate against Fry and Peterson). It's a wizard wheeze when you've got guilty white middle class people who don't mind if Lammy comes out with tosh like that below, but turns out not to be very clever when white people suddenly start identifying as white and a backlash starts.

    Almost as if we should treat people as individuals and judge them on the content of their character rather than the colour of their skin. Identity politics is rancid.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1027522656994775040

    Fuck me. All politics is identity politics. It is pretty much axiomatic.

    However when people complain about "Identity Politics" they are not complaining about self organised groups of people coming together to wield political power. They are dog whistling about no longer being able to discriminate without consequences against formerly marginalised groups because the marginalised groups organised.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Alistair, nonsense.

    Dismissing someone's view because of their race isn't axiomatic of all politics, just a very stupid fringe variety.

    You're talking about dog whistling whilst studiously avoiding any condemnation of someone's opinion being dismissed because of their skin colour. That's not so much a dog whistle as a foghorn.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688

    Mr. Alistair, pish.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics

    Identity politics are political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify. Identity politics includes the ways in which people's politics are shaped by aspects of their identity through loosely correlated social organizations. Examples include social organizations based on age, religion, social class or caste, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, sex, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, political party affiliation, sexual orientation, settlement, urban and rural habitation, and veteran status.
    *

    It's about people identifying, for example, as black, then claiming the right to money from white people (as Michael Dyson did in a debate against Fry and Peterson). It's a wizard wheeze when you've got guilty white middle class people who don't mind if Lammy comes out with tosh like that below, but turns out not to be very clever when white people suddenly start identifying as white and a backlash starts.

    Almost as if we should treat people as individuals and judge them on the content of their character rather than the colour of their skin. Identity politics is rancid.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1027522656994775040

    Lammy suggesting that only the non-white can define racism. What a fool.

    I have no intrinsic sympathy, beyond the norm, to anyone - child, mother, yellow, orange, whatever. I don't care for a moment if your ancestors had a bad time of things. I don't care for a moment if you can prove that my ancestors were involved in giving your ancestors a hard time. I mainly care about who you are, what you have to say for yourself, and how you act. I would hope to be encountered similarly.

    Lammy is just playing a card. He's blaming everyone else for his token thoughts.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548
    "normal people on twitter" ?

    That's where his argument falls down ... ;)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Omnium, quite.

    Anyway, I must be off. Play nicely kids, and remember to judge arguments based on quality of thought, not the skin colour of those debating.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780
    Danny565 said:

    ...as do women who disfigure their faces with botox and fillers and whatnot.

    The trick is just to get a little bit around the corner of the eyes. They call it "sparkles" here in LA.

    Some of my (male) friends have Brotox parties, where they drink whiskey and get botoxed. (True.)
  • rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either.

    (Although if I, as a newspaper publisher don't want to take an advert - for whatever reason - that is my concern. I shouldn't be obliged to carry something promoting gay marriage, scientology, or French cheese. It's my newspaper, and I'll starve if I want to.)
    They should be allowed to wear what they want and to be ridiculed for so doing if people wish to ridicule them.

    Spot on.

    And the points Boris was making.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Ah, I see we are due another bout of trying to find a definition of Identity Politics (which is new and terrible) that doesn't also define Class Politics (which is old and honourable)
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either.

    (Although if I, as a newspaper publisher don't want to take an advert - for whatever reason - that is my concern. I shouldn't be obliged to carry something promoting gay marriage, scientology, or French cheese. It's my newspaper, and I'll starve if I want to.)
    They should be allowed to wear what they want and to be ridiculed for so doing if people wish to ridicule them.

    Spot on.

    And the points Boris was making.
    Not spot on at all. Ridiculing people is generally bloody rude (does it ever happen to you? Do you like it when it does?) You can ridicule peoples' opinions if you like, but that is the exception rather than the rule.

    All forms of clothing are a cultural choice, and its bizarre how out of the millions of sorts of garment in the world it is two or three, worn by one religio-racial grouping, that we hear anything about.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    On topic.
    We've studiously avoided talking about yesterday's man Brandon Lewis.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either...
    People aren’t allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London ?

    And you don’t believe there ought to be laws against incitement to racial hatred ?

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Alistair said:

    Ah, I see we are due another bout of trying to find a definition of Identity Politics (which is new and terrible) that doesn't also define Class Politics (which is old and honourable)

    We were, but Lammy's ridiculous claim about racism-identification by honkies has put the argument to bed. What an arse.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,756
    Can we have a PB approved list of those who can be ridiculed to infinity and beyond for their appearance? Will all of these be on the list?

    Nuns
    Rabbis
    Imams
    Orthodox Jews
    Priests
    Buddhists
    Sikhs
    Transvestites
    Middle aged blokes who wear Superdry
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092

    Can we have a PB approved list of those who can be ridiculed to infinity and beyond for their appearance? Will all of these be on the list?

    Nuns
    Rabbis
    Imams
    Orthodox Jews
    Priests
    Buddhists
    Sikhs
    Transvestites
    Middle aged blokes who wear Superdry

    Kleider machen Leute, oder?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    edited August 2018
    O/T Poor Test Match - England great, India poor. It's games like that will be accelerate the demise of Test Cricket. Conditions were not conducive to make this a great spectacle between bat and bowl. Poor pitch doesn't help (unreliable bounce on what was a day 2 wicket). Poor effort all round (Indian batting and the groundsman).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547
    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.

    https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1027879104484442112
  • Does anyone agree with me that this years Premiership will be a procession for City with Liverpool coming second but not on the same planet as City

    As a Man Utd supporter since 1953 I can only say that City deserve all the praise they are receiving, even after only one round of matches

    Many Premier league teams are just not up to the standard and some are going to get hammered. The PL runs the risk of becoming one long predictable bore
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590

    rcs1000 said:

    Mr. 1000, like bikini ads and grid girls?

    Got to prove how feminist we are by taking work from women to satisfy the terminally offended...

    I think people should be allowed to wear bikinis on the streets of London. I think they should be allowed to wear KKK outfits. I think firms should be allowed to avertise their products with either.

    (Although if I, as a newspaper publisher don't want to take an advert - for whatever reason - that is my concern. I shouldn't be obliged to carry something promoting gay marriage, scientology, or French cheese. It's my newspaper, and I'll starve if I want to.)
    They should be allowed to wear what they want and to be ridiculed for so doing if people wish to ridicule them.
    I mean if I decided to live up to my Nudistani heritage and pluck up the courage to walk around stark raving naked, wouldn't I expect to be ridiculed to infinity and beyond?
    No need to go to such lengths, Sunil.
    :smile:
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,004
    edited August 2018
    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.

    https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1027879104484442112
    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    It does seem remainers are trying to paint him into that corner for their own ends of stopping Brexit
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,096

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/12/boris-johnson-moment-more-decisive-rivers-of-blood
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,590
    edited August 2018
    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    IanB2 said:

    [Tory Peer Lord] Cooper said: “The rottenness of Boris Johnson goes deeper even than his casual racism and his equally casual courting of fascism. He will advocate literally anything to play to the crowd of the moment. His career is a saga of moral emptiness and lies; pathetic, weak and needy; the opposite of strong.”

    Islam is not a race.
    So what word would you use? "Sectarian"? "Theophobic"?
    And anyway races are not really races either - the concept is very 19th century and shouldn't really have survived the disovery of what dna is and how it is distributed , and racism is not about race, even if they were. Racists hate, for example, "Pakis" which is a nationality and "niggers" which is a wide range of tones of skin colour and an amazing diversity of genetically distinct groupings. Given the overwhelming mapability of Islam to a certain number of nationalities and skin colours I have no problem at all identifying Johnson's problem as racism. "I hate Muzzies" is not in any interesting way different from "I hate Pakis".
    +1

    Though in Boris’ case it’s entirely self-serving opportunism.
  • FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    The danger is he could be
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
  • kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


  • murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237
    edited August 2018

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
  • viewcode said:

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
    But where is the evidence Boris is heading alt right.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    edited August 2018
    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/12/boris-johnson-moment-more-decisive-rivers-of-blood
    "When Enoch Powell made his notorious “rivers of blood” speech, the then Conservative party leader, Edward Heath, was able to despatch him to the fringes of political life with relative ease. But the new contours of the web mean that there are no fringes: only voices, and those eager to heed them."

    This rings false on two levels. Powell was a self-consciously serious figure being genuinely inflammatory and his use of language like "the whip hand" seemed calculated to incite hatred. More significantly, Powell was actually able to mobilise support on the ground in a way that was far more of a threat than anything Boris Johnson could muster.

    Boris on the other hand is just "being Boris", in the sense of being a second-rate controversialist who should never have come anywhere near high office.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    At least Brexiteers are no longer ugly ;)
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    Is The Good Lord Ashcroft still involved with the Tories?

    You never hear much about him these days...
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Invective is very difficult. You are no good at it. You continually call people stupid, but have never posted anything suggesting you are intellectually above the bottom thirty percentile of the population, and never expressed a substantive opinion about anything.

    Just saying.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237

    viewcode said:

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
    But where is the evidence Boris is heading alt right.
    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    viewcode said:

    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?

    I think Bannon gets far too much credit for the Trump playbook. Trump has a point when he says that Bannon only came on board late in the day after he'd already seen off the Republican party and didn't do much to help.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    viewcode said:

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
    You are quoting an anonymous source in the Daily Mirror as actaul evidence of something?

    Here is Bannon himself

    “Boris Johnson is one of the most important persons on the world stage today,” Bannon said. He described Johnson as “his own guy” and said he had “texted a lot” with him and spoken by phone with him during this month’s London trip.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-politics-bannon/ex-trump-strategist-bannon-targets-britain-in-anti-eu-campaign-idUKKBN1KH260

    Note the pathetic claim - Bannon spoke to Johnson *by phone* when they were both in London. Not "I speak to him by phone from the USA and meet him in London."
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237

    viewcode said:

    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?

    I think Bannon gets far too much credit for the Trump playbook. Trump has a point when he says that Bannon only came on board late in the day after he'd already seen off the Republican party and didn't do much to help.
    Which makes Bannon's influence on Boris worse, not better... :(
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Mr. Alistair, nonsense.

    Dismissing someone's view because of their race isn't axiomatic of all politics, just a very stupid fringe variety.

    You're talking about dog whistling whilst studiously avoiding any condemnation of someone's opinion being dismissed because of their skin colour. That's not so much a dog whistle as a foghorn.

    Luckily for our folk dancing friend, crimes against metaphors don't actually carry any legal significance.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,237
    Ishmael_Z said:

    viewcode said:

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
    You are quoting an anonymous source in the Daily Mirror as actaul evidence of something?

    Here is Bannon himself

    “Boris Johnson is one of the most important persons on the world stage today,” Bannon said. He described Johnson as “his own guy” and said he had “texted a lot” with him and spoken by phone with him during this month’s London trip.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-politics-bannon/ex-trump-strategist-bannon-targets-britain-in-anti-eu-campaign-idUKKBN1KH260

    Note the pathetic claim - Bannon spoke to Johnson *by phone* when they were both in London. Not "I speak to him by phone from the USA and meet him in London."
    Noted. Thank you for the source.
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    They are longstanding friends, have each other's phone numbers and text each other.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnsons-new-puppeteer-steve-13069311

    It would be perhaps naive to conclude that Bannon has no influence on Boris. Boris is somewhat weak-minded ("All-Out War" and "Fall Out" revealed his tendency towards agonised indecision, and the conversation with Darius Guppy shows his inability to confront the aggressive) and the synchronicity between Bannon's meeting with Boris and Bannon trying to unify the European far-right is difficult to dismiss as a coincidence.
    But where is the evidence Boris is heading alt right.
    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?
    I just do not see his alt right opinions other than Brexit . But I am not a supporter of Boris for PM
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited August 2018

    viewcode said:

    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?

    I think Bannon gets far too much credit for the Trump playbook. Trump has a point when he says that Bannon only came on board late in the day after he'd already seen off the Republican party and didn't do much to help.
    Bannon was crucial in focusing Trump on the white working class states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, states which leaned Democratic and which had not voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1988.

    It was winning those states which won Trump the Electoral College and the presidency and where Trump spent a marathon final few days of the campaign holding rally after rally. It was the white working class concern over immigration and globalisation in the rustbelt which Bannon recognised and which won the election for Trump, much as similar concerns held by the white working class in the industrial Midlands and North East in particular in the UK won the EU referendum for Leave
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    Ishmael_Z said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Invective is very difficult. You are no good at it. You continually call people stupid, but have never posted anything suggesting you are intellectually above the bottom thirty percentile of the population, and never expressed a substantive opinion about anything.

    Just saying.
    Thanks for the compliment.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
    I agree. I think he wins easily if he gets to that stage.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited August 2018

    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
    There is no doubt if Boris wins the Tory leadership he would be the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher but like her would polarise opinion, the eurosceptic right will love him, the liberal left will loathe him.

    However you could also say Corbyn is the most charismatic Labour leader since Blair and the fact he polarises opinion too did not do him too much damage at the 2017 general election
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    edited August 2018
    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?

    I think Bannon gets far too much credit for the Trump playbook. Trump has a point when he says that Bannon only came on board late in the day after he'd already seen off the Republican party and didn't do much to help.
    Bannon was crucial in focusing Trump on the white working class states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, states which leaned Democratic and which had not voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1988.

    It was winning those states which won Trump the Electoral College and the presidency and where Trump spent a marathon final few days of the campaign holding rally after rally. It was the white working class concern over immigration and globalisation in the rustbelt which Bannon recognised and which won the election for Trump, much as similar concerns held by the white working class in industrial Midlands and North East in particular in the UK won the EU referendum for Leave
    You're perfectly illustrating my point by giving Bannon too much credit.

    Bannon only joined the Trump campaign on Aug. 16, 2016. By then the shape of where his win would come from was already baked in. Trump had already been making a big play about stopping Ford from moving their factories from Michigan to Mexico, etc.

    This was a whole year before Bannon got involved.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hhIT2H-UKQ
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,964
    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
    Doesn't leave anywhere to go to call Corbyn, though......
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited August 2018
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
    There is no doubt if Boris wins the Tory leadership he would be the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher but like her would polarise opinion, the eurosceptic right will love him, the liberal left will loathe him.

    However you could also say Corbyn is the most charismatic Labour leader since Blair and the fact he polarises opinion too did not do him too much damage at the 2017 general election
    My concern is either of those two leading this country, not whether the Tories would win or not.

    Boris Johnson, the Corbyn of the right?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,964

    Can we have a PB approved list of those who can be ridiculed to infinity and beyond for their appearance? Will all of these be on the list?

    Nuns
    Rabbis
    Imams
    Orthodox Jews
    Priests
    Buddhists
    Sikhs
    Transvestites
    Middle aged blokes who wear Superdry

    Anyone with metal face furniture?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Boris won the Presidency of the Oxford Union by pretending to be SDP. He won the Mayor of London twice by being a socially liberal Conservative who could reach beyond the party. His views on the burka and Niqab is that although he really does not like people choosing to live in our country but choosing to keep themselves apart from it he opposes a ban.

    He, Cameron and Osborne have always had a lot in common. They reached a different conclusion on EU membership but the suggestion that Boris is in some way alt right in his views is frankly absurd. That does not mean that he does not recognise the power of some of their techniques in the modern world. He recognises the importance of the vivid phrase or image in a sound bite world and he is good at it. That does not make him right wing. He isn't.

    Unfortunately he is not very good at being diligent and getting on with the day job either. His love of the colourful phrase tempts him into saying things inconsistent with serious office (the Mayor of course being largely a joke figure). I seriously hope he never becomes PM. But suggesting his views have anything in common with Bannon is just ridiculous.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    edited August 2018

    HYUFD said:

    viewcode said:

    The recent burka comment was (as @geoffw pointed out) out of the Trump playbook. The steps were:

    1) issue dog-whistle article
    2) retreat from field
    3) leave others to repeat and amplify the message
    4) get allies to use phrases like "they're trying to shut down the debate!"

    If this was ten years ago I'd expect the phrase "marketplace of ideas" to crop up, but that's not so popular these days.

    If "Bannon" was a communicable disease, and within weeks of being contacted Boris started acting "Bannonically", would you be similarly asking for evidence?

    I think Bannon gets far too much credit for the Trump playbook. Trump has a point when he says that Bannon only came on board late in the day after he'd already seen off the Republican party and didn't do much to help.
    Bannon was crucial in focusing Trump on the white working class states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, states which leaned Democratic and which had not voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1988.

    It was winning those states which won Trump the Electoral College and the presidency and where Trump spent a marathon final few days of the campaign holding rally after rally. It was the white working class concern over immigration and globalisation in the rustbelt which Bannon recognised and which won the election for Trump, much as similar concerns held by the white working class in industrial Midlands and North East in particular in the UK won the EU referendum for Leave
    You're perfectly illustrating my point by giving Bannon too much credit.

    Bannon only joined the Trump campaign on Aug. 16, 2016. By then the shape of where his win would come from was already baked in. Trump had already been making a big play about stopping Ford from moving their factories from Michigan to Mexico, etc.

    This was a whole year before Bannon got involved.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hhIT2H-UKQ
    Trump was moving in that direction of course but it was Bannon who provided the intellectual heft behind the Trump message based on Bannon's economic nationalist beliefs in reducing immigration and restricting free trade with China and Mexico and an opposition to military interventions overseas.

    He is a populist nationalist conservative rather than a fiscal conservative, he even supports raising income tax on those with incomes of over $5 million dollars a year. Indeed despite his Harvard MBA and his position as a VP at Goldman Sachs and as an executive producer in Hollywood Bannon despises the California, New York, Ivy League and DC coastal elites all of whom voted heavily for Hillary
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
    There is no doubt if Boris wins the Tory leadership he would be the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher but like her would polarise opinion, the eurosceptic right will love him, the liberal left will loathe him.

    However you could also say Corbyn is the most charismatic Labour leader since Blair and the fact he polarises opinion too did not do him too much damage at the 2017 general election
    My concern is either of those two leading this country, not whether the Tories would win or not.

    Boris Johnson, the Corbyn of the right?
    That is probably more likely Mogg, Boris would be a cross between Trump and Berlusconi
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Evening all, cup of tea anyone ?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,547

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and ei verything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.

    https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1027879104484442112
    I do not like Boris but he does have a liberal streak in him and he also knows going alt right will see the end of his ambitions. Apart from a rumoured meeting with Bannon I see no evidence of a move in that direction

    It does seem remainers are trying to paint him into that corner for their own ends of stopping Brexit
    I don't think it's a Brexit point particularly. I think the burqa is a silly garment, as is the fashion of wearing your trousers so low on your hips that you expose your underpants. In neither case do I imply the wearer is inhuman and like a bank robber. l have nothing to say about it. That's a liberal response. People can say what they want. No-one would pay any attention to Johnson, except he's a politician with ambitions making a calculated political statement
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,082
    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
    I would agree, but with different reasoning.

    While I appreciate that the C word is used as the most offensive form of swearing, I see it as inherently misogynistic to do so. It implies that the sexual organs of women are the most shameful and dirty thing possible. To use such language suggests a deeply held fear of female sexuality. Being a dick or a prick is mild in comparison. I personally think female sexuality should be respected and celebrated so would not use the C word as a term of abuse.

    So, while I have a low opinion of Boris, I would prefer other terms to describe him, indeed in the flowery archaic language that Boris favours, I would suggest that he is a cad, blackguard and mounteback.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780

    Does anyone agree with me that this years Premiership will be a procession for City with Liverpool coming second but not on the same planet as City

    As a Man Utd supporter since 1953 I can only say that City deserve all the praise they are receiving, even after only one round of matches

    Many Premier league teams are just not up to the standard and some are going to get hammered. The PL runs the risk of becoming one long predictable bore

    That's pretty much the way I see it too. Man U's win against Leicester showed nothing had changed from last year. We still play too defensively, don't try to kill games with more goals, are pedestrian in possession and, despite Pogba, have far more perspiration than inspiration through the team.

    City look stronger than ever and Liverpool are actually fun to watch (and as a Man U supporter from the early 60s that hurts more than almost anything else). It will be between Man U and Chelsea for 3rd but a long way back. Mourinho gone by Christmas remains a real possibility and not one to be dreaded by any means. Zidane would be interesting.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,780
    Foxy said:

    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
    I would agree, but with different reasoning.

    While I appreciate that the C word is used as the most offensive form of swearing, I see it as inherently misogynistic to do so. It implies that the sexual organs of women are the most shameful and dirty thing possible. To use such language suggests a deeply held fear of female sexuality. Being a dick or a prick is mild in comparison. I personally think female sexuality should be respected and celebrated so would not use the C word as a term of abuse.

    So, while I have a low opinion of Boris, I would prefer other terms to describe him, indeed in the flowery archaic language that Boris favours, I would suggest that he is a cad, blackguard and mounteback.
    Not sure I entirely follow why being a c is worse than being a d but generally I agree. English has so many vituperative words, bounder and reprobate are 2 more that are apposite and no doubt there are many more. Such coarseness is unnecessary.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    HYUFD said:

    Trump was moving in that direction of course but it was Bannon who provided the intellectual heft behind the Trump message based on Bannon's economic nationalist beliefs in reducing immigration and restricting free trade with China and Mexico and an opposition to military interventions overseas.

    He is a populist nationalist conservative rather than a fiscal conservative, he even supports raising income tax on those with incomes of over $5 million dollars a year. Indeed despite his Harvard MBA and his position as a VP at Goldman Sachs and as an executive producer in Hollywood Bannon despises the California, New York, Ivy League and DC coastal elites all of whom voted heavily for Hillary

    In other words Trump won on his own philosophy, not Bannon's.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Brexit is collapsing before our eyes.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/11/brexit-swansea-leave-voting-turns-against-brexit-remain?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Politic is a tough business. You've got to have a programme, win people over to it and implement it. If you aren't in that game you are just posturing. Winning a referendum isn't enough. You need to be able to put the plan into action.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,265



    But where is the evidence Boris is heading alt right.

    I think the evidence that Boris believes anything in particular is shaky. That can mean that he's not too bad in office - I'd accept he was a reasonable mayor. But it does mean that you can't rely on him being either liberal or alt-right - he'll be whatever seems useful at the time.

    In that, he resembles Donald Trump, who is not so much consistently reactionary as completely unpredictable.
  • HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    Ian Dunt calls this right in my view. Boris Johnson's intervention has nothing to do with curtailment of free speech and everything to do with Boris Johnson staking his claim to alt-right identity politics. Graeme Archer mistakes who really is indulging in identity politics.
    Yes, I have to say I haven't really picked up much anger about the whole thing, except perhaps from Conservatives angry that they have taken Corbyn's problems off the front pages. Boris Johnson has the disadvantage that while he can draw attention to himself, he is no longer taken seriously.
    We'll see, should he get to the final two in the next Tory leadership contest; I think he is taken a lot more seriously than he should, given how he behaves, but taken seriously he is.
    If that happens he will win the leadership on present membership attitudes ( not me)
    There is no doubt if Boris wins the Tory leadership he would be the most charismatic Tory leader since Thatcher but like her would polarise opinion, the eurosceptic right will love him, the liberal left will loathe him.

    However you could also say Corbyn is the most charismatic Labour leader since Blair and the fact he polarises opinion too did not do him too much damage at the 2017 general election
    Corbyn is just a cult figure with no charisma outside his followers.

    If Boris won a proper leadership contest with hustings, mps voting down to two, and then he is elected it would be his responsibilty to act for all the party and the party to back him. Dominic Grieve may regret his unnecessary remarks this week

    Mind you I still do not support Boris
  • DavidL said:

    Does anyone agree with me that this years Premiership will be a procession for City with Liverpool coming second but not on the same planet as City

    As a Man Utd supporter since 1953 I can only say that City deserve all the praise they are receiving, even after only one round of matches

    Many Premier league teams are just not up to the standard and some are going to get hammered. The PL runs the risk of becoming one long predictable bore

    That's pretty much the way I see it too. Man U's win against Leicester showed nothing had changed from last year. We still play too defensively, don't try to kill games with more goals, are pedestrian in possession and, despite Pogba, have far more perspiration than inspiration through the team.

    City look stronger than ever and Liverpool are actually fun to watch (and as a Man U supporter from the early 60s that hurts more than almost anything else). It will be between Man U and Chelsea for 3rd but a long way back. Mourinho gone by Christmas remains a real possibility and not one to be dreaded by any means. Zidane would be interesting.
    Mourinho gone would be a huge benefit. He destroys players not motivates
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    O/T Just been dipping into the European Championships...

    How did Britain become so good at sport? I seem to remember in the 30 or 40 years ago we were always embarrassingly poor compared with (both East & West) Germany; but this time Britain 25 golds, Germany only 12 !?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Foxy said:

    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
    I would agree, but with different reasoning.

    While I appreciate that the C word is used as the most offensive form of swearing, I see it as inherently misogynistic to do so. It implies that the sexual organs of women are the most shameful and dirty thing possible. To use such language suggests a deeply held fear of female sexuality. Being a dick or a prick is mild in comparison. I personally think female sexuality should be respected and celebrated so would not use the C word as a term of abuse.

    So, while I have a low opinion of Boris, I would prefer other terms to describe him, indeed in the flowery archaic language that Boris favours, I would suggest that he is a cad, blackguard and mounteback.
    Personally I think reading that much into an insult is very silly, particularly when you decide to infer 'deeply held' fears based on the use of a single word, and especially when you decide to essentially condemn someone for deep seated misogyny merely for using a single word. However bad the intent behind the use of the word, and notwithstanding that I would agree it being a harsher insult than being a dick or prick is sexist, ascribing to any person who uses it such condemnation, not for using it but accusing them of deeply held beliefs you have no evidence for, is deeply deeply unfair.
  • Foxy said:

    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Why are we talking about Boris' intention? His intentions are clear - it's all about him and his career. Anyone who doesn't understand that fact is as thick as shit!

    The c*nt knifed his so-called friend David Cameron. He's far from stupid and came to the conclusion that staying in the EU was the most appropriate and logical choice at the referendum but decided to play against that retaliation purely for HIS own political ambitions.

    The same viz-a-viz the burka/niqab. It's all about him folks!

    Brexit = a calamity
    Bexiteers = xenophobes / little Englanders / thickos (delete as appropriate).


    Why do you continue to demean yourself with your language.
    Calling Boris a c*nt is hardly demeaning!
    I would agree, but with different reasoning.

    While I appreciate that the C word is used as the most offensive form of swearing, I see it as inherently misogynistic to do so. It implies that the sexual organs of women are the most shameful and dirty thing possible. To use such language suggests a deeply held fear of female sexuality. Being a dick or a prick is mild in comparison. I personally think female sexuality should be respected and celebrated so would not use the C word as a term of abuse.

    So, while I have a low opinion of Boris, I would prefer other terms to describe him, indeed in the flowery archaic language that Boris favours, I would suggest that he is a cad, blackguard and mounteback.
    A really good post and one many could learn from
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    DavidL said:

    Boris won the Presidency of the Oxford Union by pretending to be SDP. He won the Mayor of London twice by being a socially liberal Conservative who could reach beyond the party. His views on the burka and Niqab is that although he really does not like people choosing to live in our country but choosing to keep themselves apart from it he opposes a ban.

    He, Cameron and Osborne have always had a lot in common. They reached a different conclusion on EU membership but the suggestion that Boris is in some way alt right in his views is frankly absurd. That does not mean that he does not recognise the power of some of their techniques in the modern world. He recognises the importance of the vivid phrase or image in a sound bite world and he is good at it. That does not make him right wing. He isn't.

    Unfortunately he is not very good at being diligent and getting on with the day job either. His love of the colourful phrase tempts him into saying things inconsistent with serious office (the Mayor of course being largely a joke figure). I seriously hope he never becomes PM. But suggesting his views have anything in common with Bannon is just ridiculous.

    I don't think he believes such things, and that those who do will be disappointed in him as PM. I do think he would pursue any path that he thinks will help him come to power however.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone agree with me that this years Premiership will be a procession for City with Liverpool coming second but not on the same planet as City

    As a Man Utd supporter since 1953 I can only say that City deserve all the praise they are receiving, even after only one round of matches

    Many Premier league teams are just not up to the standard and some are going to get hammered. The PL runs the risk of becoming one long predictable bore

    That's pretty much the way I see it too. Man U's win against Leicester showed nothing had changed from last year. We still play too defensively, don't try to kill games with more goals, are pedestrian in possession and, despite Pogba, have far more perspiration than inspiration through the team.

    City look stronger than ever and Liverpool are actually fun to watch (and as a Man U supporter from the early 60s that hurts more than almost anything else). It will be between Man U and Chelsea for 3rd but a long way back. Mourinho gone by Christmas remains a real possibility and not one to be dreaded by any means. Zidane would be interesting.
    Mourinho gone would be a huge benefit. He destroys players not motivates
    Yep, totally agree. Don't think you will find many Man U fans expressing support for Mourinho; the sooner he's gone the better.
  • O/T Just been dipping into the European Championships...

    How did Britain become so good at sport? I seem to remember in the 30 or 40 years ago we were always embarrassingly poor compared with (both East & West) Germany; but this time Britain 25 golds, Germany only 12 !?

    Getting prepared for Brexit !!!!!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289

    O/T Just been dipping into the European Championships...

    How did Britain become so good at sport? I seem to remember in the 30 or 40 years ago we were always embarrassingly poor compared with (both East & West) Germany; but this time Britain 25 golds, Germany only 12 !?

    Getting prepared for Brexit !!!!!
    I think you'll find our improvement has been during our EU membership :)
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    Wait, I thought the Leave/Remain split was still about the same?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289
    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    You're right of course. Good job it's such a safe pair of hands... Oh, sh*t...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited August 2018
    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    If the nation has turned against Brexit why would it still happen at all? Indeed, would it not rise up against even a BINO if it had turned against the B?

    People really do overdo it sometimes. As for reading mood music, that's what people do to justify backing what they want to happen at every election - the mood music tells them that despite the polls, or anything else, the country is behind them.

    Polls are not great indicators much of the time, but mood music is no better than reading entrails.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    RobD said:

    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    Wait, I thought the Leave/Remain split was still about the same?
    I’m no believer in polls. They are a very blunt instrument, at best. The mood music is a better indicator. Brexit is no longer popular.
  • O/T Just been dipping into the European Championships...

    How did Britain become so good at sport? I seem to remember in the 30 or 40 years ago we were always embarrassingly poor compared with (both East & West) Germany; but this time Britain 25 golds, Germany only 12 !?

    Getting prepared for Brexit !!!!!
    I think you'll find our improvement has been during our EU membership :)
    I was joking Ben !!!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    kle4 said:

    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    If the nation has turned against Brexit why would it still happen at all? Indeed, would it not rise up against even a BINO if it had turned against the B?
    Exactly, but "now is not the time". May still needs to push No Deal support down a lot further before allowing the possibility of an alternative to BINO.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    Anazina said:

    RobD said:

    Anazina said:

    I think it is fairly clear now that the nation has turned against Brexit. May has a clear opportunity for a BINO fudge. She should grab it with both hands.

    Wait, I thought the Leave/Remain split was still about the same?
    I’m no believer in polls. They are a very blunt instrument, at best. The mood music is a better indicator. Brexit is no longer popular.
    I’m no massive believer of polls either; but down here in Dorset the mood music is that people want to get on with Brexit.

    You see the problem with ‘mood music’?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,289

    O/T Just been dipping into the European Championships...

    How did Britain become so good at sport? I seem to remember in the 30 or 40 years ago we were always embarrassingly poor compared with (both East & West) Germany; but this time Britain 25 golds, Germany only 12 !?

    Getting prepared for Brexit !!!!!
    I think you'll find our improvement has been during our EU membership :)
    I was joking Ben !!!
    Sorry, couldn't stop myself biting! :wink:
This discussion has been closed.