What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
And no deal isn't going to any referendum. Even our politicians retain some ability to learn from previous mistakes.
ThisIs the most curious long running misconception in the history of pb. You cannot resolve to leave without it being implicit that you will leave with no deal if necessary, because otherwise you are committing to accepting whatever terms the eh chooses to impose.
Which is one reason why leaving was always a bad idea.
It was why having the Legislature involved in the minutae of the negotations was utter batshit-crazy stoopid.
There was only one approach that could ever work. Here's the final deal - take it, or else leave with no deal. Your call.
Which is what May wanted to do. Parliament demanded flexibility so it could chase unicorns, and of course to enable remain if it could manage it.
You can understand why. Dozens and dozens of grandstanding pillocks....
Without defending Williamson's idiotic posturing I don't recall Osborne's trade missions to China as being particularly successful. Hinkley Point for example.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
I don’t think it’s equivalent. The Tories are one of the biggest conservative parties in Europe if they had engaged in the EPP when they were on the up, they would certainly have influenced it. Running away achieved absolutely nothing.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
I don’t think it’s equivalent. The Tories are one of the biggest conservative parties in Europe if they had engaged in the EPP when they were on the up, they would certainly have influenced it. Running away achieved absolutely nothing.
We can achieve a 'British Europe' The EU is moving our way Germany will need an ally against France France will need an ally against Germany If we widen the EU it will stop it from deepening
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
I don’t think it’s equivalent. The Tories are one of the biggest conservative parties in Europe if they had engaged in the EPP when they were on the up, they would certainly have influenced it. Running away achieved absolutely nothing.
That is so right. The Conservatives had huge assets when it came to exerting influence. The EU parliament has been predominantly right wing for ages. They were a big group, as you say. The history of politics doesn't offer many spectacles of such a huge mismatch between the action that would have been advantageous and the action that was actually taken.
I had a go at pretending to be from London and it came out as Reading/Brighton. I did it again pretending to be from west central Scotland and it worked okay, although it also said I could be from Wick, Orkney or Northern Ireland.
Without defending Williamson's idiotic posturing I don't recall Osborne's trade missions to China as being particularly successful. Hinkley Point for example.
Even more idiotic when it appears the said aircraft carrier wont be fit to go there for at least two years
There was only one approach that could ever work. Here's the final deal - take it, or else leave with no deal. Your call.
The government could not have survived the day with that stance
Yet it is what the Lisbon Treaty says.
We have hundreds of Mps spitting mad that no deal is even possible despite them voting to trigger A50, and plenty others who claim or imply the 2 year period is Mays choice. What treaties do or do not say obviously doesn't matter to such people.
Maybe they just don't understand the Bills that they pass.
Maybe prospective MPs should undergo compulsory legislative training prior to their election.
If they failed to turn up or complete the course, or wished to slag off the modules, fine but at least then their prospective constituents would know.
Finally caught up on the first episode of Europe, 10 years of turmoil, last night. Was very good for those who like me thought another program about Brexit was above and beyond. Several things struck me relevant to this thread.
Firstly, Osborne's dig at May about generally saying little and contributing less. As DavidH says she has generally been cautious throughout her career. Secondly, her one substantial intervention was to insist on DC adding further conditionality on immigration to his deal, something Cameron achieved. May will not go for a deal that does not deal with freedom of movement.
Finally, it was difficult not to be totally exasperated with the Europeans who completely underestimated the challenges that Cameron was facing and the risk of losing far, far more than Cameron was asking for. A massive misjudgment with the benefit of hindsight, particularly by Merkel.
There was inevitably some ex post facto justification going on but well worth a watch. I will try to watch episode 2, the Greek tragedy, over the weekend.
It's an excellent series, David. You won't be disappointed by the Greek episode.
I couldn't agree more with your assessment of the EU's treatment of Cameron. I think with the benefit of hindsight they can see that they they not only put the UK's membership at risk but briefly jeopardised the whole EU project.
That danger appears to have passed but they were clearly unwise to have dismissed British concerns so lightly.
Those concerns are still legitimate and form the basis not only of a lot of the current difficulties with the Brexit process but also grievances in other countries.
If they really believed that their actions "not only put the UK's membership at risk but briefly jeopardised the whole EU project", they wouldn't be making the same mistakes now.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
What influence? You can be in the inner core that goes along with EPP decisions but you can’t stop them. The Conservatives continuing to be a member wouldn’t have stopped Jean-Claude Juncker as EU Commission president or the propositions for common asylum systems, a European army or European tax powers, all of which the EPP support.
Such influence as it does exist would come in influencing the review of the technical detail of proposed single market regulations by the EU Commission in the European Parliament.
Got me to Northern England (North Yorks/ Durham/ Pennines), Which wasn't too bad I suppose. (Born in Consett, father from Doncaster, Mother from Durham)
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
Without defending Williamson's idiotic posturing I don't recall Osborne's trade missions to China as being particularly successful. Hinkley Point for example.
Even more idiotic when it appears the said aircraft carrier wont be fit to go there for at least two years
The purpose of the posturing wasn't to frighten China but to impress Conservative members.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
I need to crunch some numbers but my instinct is that the EPP will be a much reduced force after July, and if the UK is still a member, very likely to be a minority of the right-of-centre. It may not even be the largest group.
Finally caught up on the first episode of Europe, 10 years of turmoil, last night. Was very good for those who like me thought another program about Brexit was above and beyond. Several things struck me relevant to this thread.
Firstly, Osborne's dig at May about generally saying little and contributing less. As DavidH says she has generally been cautious throughout her career. Secondly, her one substantial intervention was to insist on DC adding further conditionality on immigration to his deal, something Cameron achieved. May will not go for a deal that does not deal with freedom of movement.
Finally, it was difficult not to be totally exasperated with the Europeans who completely underestimated the challenges that Cameron was facing and the risk of losing far, far more than Cameron was asking for. A massive misjudgment with the benefit of hindsight, particularly by Merkel.
There was inevitably some ex post facto justification going on but well worth a watch. I will try to watch episode 2, the Greek tragedy, over the weekend.
Let me know what you think.
I came away from watching it feeling even more eurosceptic. And I was really trying hard to be objective.
It is the fact that we don't have ID cards that makes the UK such an appealing destination for unofficial economic migrants. That isn't going to change post-Brexit. The only slim chance of Brexit being perceived as a success would be if there were visibly fewer immigrants afterwards....
Anyway, must go. My plan for the day is to work on my project to defeat Brexit with love. See you all later.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
I don’t think it’s equivalent. The Tories are one of the biggest conservative parties in Europe if they had engaged in the EPP when they were on the up, they would certainly have influenced it. Running away achieved absolutely nothing.
No, that's not the case: the Tories were consistently sidelined in the EPP, other than as individuals (who were usually strongly pro-EU and so EPP-inclined anyway).
The Conservatives had more influence in setting up the ECR; it's just a real shame that that project ended up aborted by Brexit.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
But, it's as if I were to be in the Labour Party, in order to influence it.
I don’t think it’s equivalent. The Tories are one of the biggest conservative parties in Europe if they had engaged in the EPP when they were on the up, they would certainly have influenced it. Running away achieved absolutely nothing.
No, that's not the case: the Tories were consistently sidelined in the EPP, other than as individuals (who were usually strongly pro-EU and so EPP-inclined anyway).
The Conservatives had more influence in setting up the ECR; it's just a real shame that that project ended up aborted by Brexit.
ECR was one of the opening shots in the road to Bloomberg, in my opinion.
If that had really got legs, and we’d got Treaty change, we wouldn’t be here now.
The EU is much better off for having the ECR and I think it’s a solid bit of British political leadership to provide an alternative political point of view in Europe that would otherwise be left to total extremists and nutters in the ENF and others.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
What influence? You can be in the inner core that goes along with EPP decisions but you can’t stop them. The Conservatives continuing to be a member wouldn’t have stopped Jean-Claude Juncker as EU Commission president or the propositions for common asylum systems, a European army or European tax powers, all of which the EPP support.
Such influence as it does exist would come in influencing the review of the technical detail of proposed single market regulations by the EU Commission in the European Parliament.
That really is about it.
If the Tories had got behind a different candidate early on I'm sure they could have stopped Juncker from being chosen by the EPP. Trying to stop him once he'd been chosen as the EPP candidate and the EPP had won the election, not so much.
What came across in the programme is that Cameron didn’t understand and therefore couldn’t engage with EU politics. He made a huge mistake in exiting the EPP.
Yes, that was very clear.
It is ironic to reflect in 2005 David Davis sold himself as pro-EU because he wasn't going to yank the Tories out of the EPP.
But to be honest I really don't see how the party stayed aligned with an explicitly federalist group given its membership. Hannan and Juncker in the same group?
Of course, if the Tories had stayed in Juncker would have been quietly relegated to sweeping floors and we might just have voted in. Karma's a bitch.
Anyway, I am off to recharge some batteries with what I hope will be a relaxing break in Wales. Have a good week.
It made no sense for the Conservatives to be in the EPP, but then it makes no sense for Fidesz to belong.
On the contrary it made every sense. It gave them influence at key decisions, influence we are now sorely lacking.
What influence? You can be in the inner core that goes along with EPP decisions but you can’t stop them. The Conservatives continuing to be a member wouldn’t have stopped Jean-Claude Juncker as EU Commission president or the propositions for common asylum systems, a European army or European tax powers, all of which the EPP support.
Such influence as it does exist would come in influencing the review of the technical detail of proposed single market regulations by the EU Commission in the European Parliament.
That really is about it.
If the Tories had got behind a different candidate early on I'm sure they could have stopped Juncker from being chosen by the EPP. Trying to stop him once he'd been chosen as the EPP candidate and the EPP had won the election, not so much.
I’m afraid I don’t share your confidence.
Even if that had been achieved the platform of the alternative candidate to Juncker would have been almost identical.
Obviously, the big difficulty with a referendum is whether to include No Deal as an option.
Leaving it out breaches May's Golden Rule: Don't Break the Tory Party.
But if it's going to be in there, will the EU approve the necessary extension unanimously? Will they view the electorate as more likely to choose No Deal than the politicians?
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
I don't think the school demo is important. With Grandkids of my own, I might smile indulgently, but I'd never take too much notice. The only rebuttal needed is to say that if they want to play-act and wander round with placards, then do it at weekends.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
But, there's nothing incorrect about it.
They are not castigating a previous generation of environmental leaders and activists.
They are castigating you, for bone-headed complacency.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
But, there's nothing incorrect about it.
They are not castigating a previous generation of environmental leaders and activists.
They are castigating you, for bone-headed complacency.
They are castigating a generation that has rather a good record at dealing with the problems they identify.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
But, there's nothing incorrect about it.
They are not castigating a previous generation of environmental leaders and activists.
They are castigating you, for bone-headed complacency.
They are castigating a generation that has rather a good record at dealing with the problems they identify.
That is surely in the eye of the beholder. That you can’t concede even that simply proves my point.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
He's correct though.
We don't hear much talk of the ozone layer and acid rain these days.
According to Google Translate, this is what else Rutte said about Brexit:
Q. Do you think an agreement can be reached before March 29?
A. My impression is that the ball is advancing towards the precipice and everyone screams to stop, but nobody does anything to stop it, at least, from the British side. Some British parliamentarians say that we want to trap them in a permanent limbo. But it is not true. The EU is interested in moving to the next phase as soon as possible and starting a new relationship with the United Kingdom. But given May's efforts to renegotiate the Irish safeguard, I do not know how this will end and if [whether] we can avoid a hard Brexit, it would be devastating for the UK.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
It's a bit like civil disobedience - if you mildly infringe the rules, it's newsworthy, if you don't, it's not. I'm not aware of any adult organisation of this protest - as far as I know, it's kids jointly expressing concern. As a one-off I think it's a reasonable exercise in early civic engagement - I wouldn't be in favour of them doing it every month, but this makes a reasonable point (that they will suffer the consequences of climate change when most of us are dead) in a peaceful way. I'd think that most head teachers would feel it was mildly positive if a bit inconvenient.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
I also don't see how getting kids to chant "Fuck Theresa May" in Trafalgar Square (as enjoyable as that was and let's hope it becomes a regular thing) can bring down the government. It wasn't exactly the Aurora shelling the Winter Palace.
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
The uncomfortable truth is that if these kids wanted to help save the planet, then their parents should never have had them in the first place....
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
But, there's nothing incorrect about it.
They are not castigating a previous generation of environmental leaders and activists.
They are castigating you, for bone-headed complacency.
They are castigating a generation that has rather a good record at dealing with the problems they identify.
That is surely in the eye of the beholder. That you can’t concede even that simply proves my point.
Any point of view is in the eye of the beholder. But it's surely uncontentious that successive governments have passed a stream of legislation that has improved our environment and will continue to do so.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
The smart response would have been to say something along the lines that it’s good for kids to be engaged, that climate change is a hugely important issue, but that it’s not right to take time off school to protest. Instead, the line was to dismiss it all as bunking off.
I suspect that the Tory tight’s next trick will be a Trumpesque rejection of measures to fight climate change and that yesterday’s responses were partly about that.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
And that would have been the motive of the parents and teachers behind this protest, which wouldn’t have happened without their extensive support.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
Agreed.
Why do we keep putting ourselves through it?
Thought 2015 was pretty OK, wasn’t it?
From exactly 10pm onwards it was fantastic.
10pm 2017 wouldn't have been half as bad either, if they had followed our advice to crank up NHS spending to the levles on the bus.
But then, Boris would have looked a winner. Instead, the whole bloody Tory Party had to become losers to prevent that.
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
Being on the world stage usually involves British lives and money being wasted so that British politicians can posture on it.
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
It's a bit like civil disobedience - if you mildly infringe the rules, it's newsworthy, if you don't, it's not. I'm not aware of any adult organisation of this protest - as far as I know, it's kids jointly expressing concern. As a one-off I think it's a reasonable exercise in early civic engagement - I wouldn't be in favour of them doing it every month, but this makes a reasonable point (that they will suffer the consequences of climate change when most of us are dead) in a peaceful way. I'd think that most head teachers would feel it was mildly positive if a bit inconvenient.
I think that’s a polite and slightly naive waffle, Nick.
Young children mass protesting against climate change would have been newsworthy regardless of the mechanism; in fact, it might have been more effective as more could have joined and More would have noticed.
It didn’t take a day off work for the People’s Vote March to get universal coverage on a Saturday.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
Agreed.
Why do we keep putting ourselves through it?
Thought 2015 was pretty OK, wasn’t it?
Mostly down to Labour having a horror, though. The Edstone, anyone?
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
It's pretty wrong-headed. The older generations they castigate are the people who have cleaned up our rivers, improved the air we breathe, stopped hunting whales to extinction, improved energy efficiency, reduced carbon emissions etc. What most of us are not prepared to do is wear a hair shirt.
Lol. You sound like the most dessicated of retired army majors.
The UK has a great record in decarbonising and is continuing to take and make big steps.
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
Being on the world stage usually involves British lives and money being wasted so that British politicians can posture on it.
Yep. Gavin Williamson cannot wait for his first conflict.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
The uncomfortable truth is that if these kids wanted to help save the planet, then their parents should never have had them in the first place....
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
Peak PB Tory.
“These kids have no right to protest, and if they really wished to make a difference, they should commit suicide.”
Mildly amused that I'm far more 'environmentally' friendly (don't go on many holidays, no car etc) than most of the Very Concerned activists and protesters.
I don't think the school demo is important. With Grandkids of my own, I might smile indulgently, but I'd never take too much notice. The only rebuttal needed is to say that if they want to play-act and wander round with placards, then do it at weekends.
I encountered a few on the anti-Iraq War March in London in 2003 with members of my Conservative Association when I was still a student.
Maybe it was unkind but we did test one or two of the more confident ones with their arguments in person as they filed past Whitehall, and they were somewhat limited to pre-learned chant lines.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
And that would have been the motive of the parents and teachers behind this protest, which wouldn’t have happened without their extensive support.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
Whereas you are dialling in your retrograde copy from...Hartlepool?
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
Agreed.
Why do we keep putting ourselves through it?
Thought 2015 was pretty OK, wasn’t it?
From exactly 10pm onwards it was fantastic.
10pm 2017 wouldn't have been half as bad either, if they had followed our advice to crank up NHS spending to the levles on the bus.
But then, Boris would have looked a winner. Instead, the whole bloody Tory Party had to become losers to prevent that.
It shows how fickle politics is at the moment, and that’s a lesson (and warning) for Labour too.
6 weeks earlier Theresa May was an all conquering hero and shooting down decades-old Labour bastions like ninepins in the locals.
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
Being on the world stage usually involves British lives and money being wasted so that British politicians can posture on it.
Yep. Gavin Williamson cannot wait for his first conflict.
So why do you think we should be concerned if his ability to do so is reduced ?
According to Google Translate, this is what else Rutte said about Brexit:
Q. Do you think an agreement can be reached before March 29?
A. My impression is that the ball is advancing towards the precipice and everyone screams to stop, but nobody does anything to stop it, at least, from the British side. Some British parliamentarians say that we want to trap them in a permanent limbo. But it is not true. The EU is interested in moving to the next phase as soon as possible and starting a new relationship with the United Kingdom. But given May's efforts to renegotiate the Irish safeguard, I do not know how this will end and if [whether] we can avoid a hard Brexit, it would be devastating for the UK.
Shouldn't there be a full stop after the last 'Brexit' and before the last 'if'?
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
And that would have been the motive of the parents and teachers behind this protest, which wouldn’t have happened without their extensive support.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
Whereas you are dialling in your retrograde copy from...Hartlepool?
You’re not at your best this morning, are you?
Those places are some of the most left-wing in the country. It’d protests in middle England or suburban England and amongst the swing constituencies I’d be worried about.
These kids will grow up to believe the Tories are lower than bacteria, and vote accordingly.
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
Being on the world stage usually involves British lives and money being wasted so that British politicians can posture on it.
Yep. Gavin Williamson cannot wait for his first conflict.
So why do you think we should be concerned if his ability to do so is reduced ?
For me the only tangible Brexit benefit will be the puncturing of the delusions of English nationalists. But I don’t think it’s a price worth paying. However, we are where we are and it’s something to look forward to.
On topic. Can I take issue with May’s performance in the last GE being poor? It wasn’t that bad. It’s a myth that needs to die now. She isn’t that bad delivering to a mic, an audience or dealing with a press conference or audience questions. May performed better at the last election than Corbyn and better than Milliband in 2015. Her manifesto was more substantial and credible than Labours, it had what was dubbed dementia tax in it (that actually wasn’t a dementia tax) her party and workers were poorly briefed on it, other than that people say Corbyn the great campaigner, May a poor one simply on the result, the result was redreamers naively flocking to Labour, a surge in youth voting because of brexit, it is wrong to believe the myth the result was down to how both party leaders campaigned. I don’t care if I’m a lone voice saying this, I am right. I was there, I know what I saw heard and analysed.
The manifesto was a disaster and cost a lot of votes.
May might be good in some settings but she was wooden in interviews, ducked the debates and took every decision possible to undermine her 'strong and stable' message, which she repeated ad nauseam, despite it clearly not being credible by week three.
The Tories failed to take Labour's manifesto apart and had no coherence or flexibility to the campaign strategy and messaging.
FWIW, I agree that Corbyn isn't that hot and for the second time, was in the right place at the right time. But May was crap.
Yeah, but apart from that the campaign was alright, wasn’t it?
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
I think 1983 was the last election when the Conservatives ran an efficient campaign.
Agreed.
Why do we keep putting ourselves through it?
Thought 2015 was pretty OK, wasn’t it?
Mostly down to Labour having a horror, though. The Edstone, anyone?
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
The uncomfortable truth is that if these kids wanted to help save the planet, then their parents should never have had them in the first place....
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
Peak PB Tory.
“These kids have no right to protest, and if they really wished to make a difference, they should commit suicide.”
Of course they can protest but that can be achieved at the weekend. The last part of your sentence is sick
My grown up children have lost several of their friends through suicide over the years
I do not think the ERG would vote for a referendum under any circumstances as No Deal is the default why risk Remain or the Deal winning. Many Labour MPs in Leave seats also remain opposed to a referendum. However if Parliament votes for an extension then May could see it as the only way out and the only way to ensure the EU agrees tgat extension and would include all options, Deal, No Deal and Remain to try and ensure a majority, probably in a Leave v Remain and if Leave then Leave with the Deal or No Deal.
Alternatively a permanent Customs Union may be able to win a majority in the Commons as well as being something the EU have said they will renegotiate for but May is unlikely to push it herself
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children goingrnative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
And that would have been the motive of the parents and teachers behind this protest, which wouldn’t have happened without their extensive support.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
Whereas you are dialling in your retrograde copy from...Hartlepool?
You’re not at your best this morning, are you?
Those places are some of the most left-wing in the country. It’d protests in middle England or suburban England and amongst the swing constituencies I’d be worried about.
These kids will grow up to believe the Tories are lower than bacteria, and vote accordingly.
To be fair, the Tories have indeed become lower than bacteria. There are strains of meningitis with a better-thought-out governing philosophy than the modern Tory party.
As for the kids, I’m reminded of Cyclefree’s post a day or so ago that said few people have moral courage to make a stand, and that most of us are cowards.
The marching children - wherever they are from - should he applauded, not sneered at.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
The uncomfortable truth is that if these kids wanted to help save the planet, then their parents should never have had them in the first place....
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
Peak PB Tory.
“These kids have no right to protest, and if they really wished to make a difference, they should commit suicide.”
Of course they can protest but that can be achieved at the weekend. The last part of your sentence is sick
My grown up children have lost several of their friends through suicide over the years
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
In that case surely the only countries able to appear on the world stage alone are the USA, China, India and maybe Russia and Japan and every other nation has to be part of a trading block or political union?
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
The uncomfortable truth is that if these kids wanted to help save the planet, then their parents should never have had them in the first place....
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
Peak PB Tory.
“These kids have no right to protest, and if they really wished to make a difference, they should commit suicide.”
Of course they can protest but that can be achieved at the weekend. The last part of your sentence is sick
My grown up children have lost several of their friends through suicide over the years
Oh god. PB’s pre-eminent pearl-clutcher awakes.
Just a genuine question. Have you ever experienced the suicide of a young person
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
Rutte is undoubtedly an Anglophile, like most Dutch people are. They are also famiusly direct. The Dutch don’t bullshit. That they think this should concern us greatly.
The strategic implication, I think, is that the UK, which for the last fifty years has presented itself as the bridge between Europe and America will find itself cut off from both.
From the article Rutte promotes the same positions as the UK previously did, for example on the EU army, and is working out how to maintain those positions now the UK is no longer involved.
People who think the Tories will never again run a GE campaign as badly as the 2017 one should look at what was clearly a co-ordinated response to the kids’ climate change strike yesterday.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I'm really not sure what the Tories were supposed to do here - express any anger at what went on and be labelled as not engaging, or condescensing, or not caring about kids or whatever, but the alternative being to back it?
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children goingrnative.
Whatever the rights or wrongs of this particular action, bringing down May's 'government' and replacing it with something competent, Left Wing or not, is a laudable aim.
And that would have been the motive of the parents and teachers behind this protest, which wouldn’t have happened without their extensive support.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
Whereas you are dialling in your retrograde copy from...Hartlepool?
You’re not at your best this morning, are you?
Those places are some of the most left-wing in the country. It’d protests in middle England or suburban England and amongst the swing constituencies I’d be worried about.
These kids will grow up to believe the Tories are lower than bacteria, and vote accordingly.
To be fair, the Tories have indeed become lower than bacteria. There are strains of meningitis with a better-thought-out governing philosophy than the modern Tory party.
As for the kids, I’m reminded of Cyclefree’s post a day or so ago that said few people have moral courage to make a stand, and that most of us are cowards.
The marching children - wherever they are from - should he applauded, not sneered at.
Though Biden supporters favour Harris as their third choice and Sanders supporters favour Warren as their third choice. 27% of Biden supporters favour Sanders as their second choice 15% of Biden supporters favour Harris and 9% favour Warren, 26% of Sanders supporters favour Biden as their second choice, 16% of Sanders supporters favour Warren as their second choice and 6% favour Harris. 20% of Harris supporters put Biden as their second choice, 25% of Warren supporters put Sanders as their second choice. 20% of O'Rourke backers put Sanders as their second choice with 18% for Biden. That suggests a clear divide is already emerging between Biden and to a lesser extent Harris on the centrist and moderate wing and Sanders and Warren on the populist left/liberal wing
Comments
The EU is moving our way
Germany will need an ally against France
France will need an ally against Germany
If we widen the EU it will stop it from deepening
Repeat for 40 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_genocide
If they failed to turn up or complete the course, or wished to slag off the modules, fine but at least then their prospective constituents would know.
If they really believed that their actions "not only put the UK's membership at risk but briefly jeopardised the whole EU project", they wouldn't be making the same mistakes now.
Such influence as it does exist would come in influencing the review of the technical detail of proposed single market regulations by the EU Commission in the European Parliament.
That really is about it.
They should be in school rather than incited by Lefty agitators in their schools to shout personal abuse at the Prime Minister.
I came away from watching it feeling even more eurosceptic. And I was really trying hard to be objective.
Anyway, must go. My plan for the day is to work on my project to defeat Brexit with love. See you all later.
The Conservatives had more influence in setting up the ECR; it's just a real shame that that project ended up aborted by Brexit.
I think Sean Fear put it well when he said he’d never enjoyed a GE campaign.
I was crapping myself from Jan 2010 onwards for GE2010, and got very depressed after the first debate. I thought it was “game over” in GE2015, although the election night was the most riveting I can remember, and in GE2017 I had a bad feeling in my gut from the moment the social care policy was announced plus in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, which I sensed backfired.
I could go back and mention the 1990s and the GE Blair victories, but I don’t want to.
They ran away from the EPP.
They ran away from the EU.
They ran away from May’s Cabinet.
They have achieved nothing, absolutely nothing, except to make the country weaker and poorer.
If that had really got legs, and we’d got Treaty change, we wouldn’t be here now.
The EU is much better off for having the ECR and I think it’s a solid bit of British political leadership to provide an alternative political point of view in Europe that would otherwise be left to total extremists and nutters in the ENF and others.
Say it’s an important issue, say that children’s education shouldn’t be disrupted and protests should be in weekends or holidays, and then list out clearly all the Government is doing about it. Which is rather a lot, actually.
The bit I really don’t like about this is the Marxist agitation and use of children going on “strike”.
Children don’t go on strike: they are not protesting against their employer nor on their terms or conditions of employment, they are in full time compulsory education, and this is pure incitement by adults who really hope to use them as tools to apply political pressure to bring down May’s Government for a Left wing alternative.
Even if that had been achieved the platform of the alternative candidate to Juncker would have been almost identical.
Leaving it out breaches May's Golden Rule: Don't Break the Tory Party.
But if it's going to be in there, will the EU approve the necessary extension unanimously? Will they view the electorate as more likely to choose No Deal than the politicians?
Why do we keep putting ourselves through it?
I don't think the school demo is important. With Grandkids of my own, I might smile indulgently, but I'd never take too much notice. The only rebuttal needed is to say that if they want to play-act and wander round with placards, then do it at weekends.
https://twitter.com/nick_gutteridge/status/1095970414151589888
There's some domestic context in the subsequent tweet.
Damning from someone hitherto considered one of our closest allies.
They are castigating you, for bone-headed complacency.
They have to back something, whether that's leaving with a deal, leaving without a deal, or revocation.
That you can’t concede even that simply proves my point.
We don't hear much talk of the ozone layer and acid rain these days.
Not that I support ERG in any form
Q. Do you think an agreement can be reached before March 29?
A. My impression is that the ball is advancing towards the precipice and everyone screams to stop, but nobody does anything to stop it, at least, from the British side. Some British parliamentarians say that we want to trap them in a permanent limbo. But it is not true. The EU is interested in moving to the next phase as soon as possible and starting a new relationship with the United Kingdom. But given May's efforts to renegotiate the Irish safeguard, I do not know how this will end and if [whether] we can avoid a hard Brexit, it would be devastating for the UK.
That's how you drastically and effectively reduce your carbon footprint. By not reproducing.
I suspect that the Tory tight’s next trick will be a Trumpesque rejection of measures to fight climate change and that yesterday’s responses were partly about that.
It wasn’t a coincidence that the biggest “protests” happened in those highly politically balanced bastions of London, Brighton, Oxford and Exeter.
But then, Boris would have looked a winner. Instead, the whole bloody Tory Party had to become losers to prevent that.
Young children mass protesting against climate change would have been newsworthy regardless of the mechanism; in fact, it might have been more effective as more could have joined and
More would have noticed.
It didn’t take a day off work for the People’s Vote March to get universal coverage on a Saturday.
The USA, China and Australia, not so much.
“These kids have no right to protest, and if they really wished to make a difference, they should commit suicide.”
Anyway, I must be off.
Maybe it was unkind but we did test one or two of the more confident ones with their arguments in person as they filed past Whitehall, and they were somewhat limited to pre-learned chant lines.
6 weeks earlier Theresa May was an all conquering hero and shooting down decades-old Labour bastions like ninepins in the locals.
Those places are some of the most left-wing in the country. It’d protests in middle England or suburban England and amongst the swing constituencies I’d be worried about.
These kids will grow up to believe the Tories are lower than bacteria, and vote accordingly.
My grown up children have lost several of their friends through suicide over the years
"within the next decade, millennials, the most diverse and perhaps most progressive generation in history, will be the single largest voting bloc."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/opinion/green-new-deal-trump.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
Alternatively a permanent Customs Union may be able to win a majority in the Commons as well as being something the EU have said they will renegotiate for but May is unlikely to push it herself
As for the kids, I’m reminded of Cyclefree’s post a day or so ago that said few people have moral courage to make a stand, and that most of us are cowards.
The marching children - wherever they are from - should he applauded, not sneered at.
https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1096457243346784257?s=21
PB’s pre-eminent pearl-clutcher awakes.
From the article Rutte promotes the same positions as the UK previously did, for example on the EU army, and is working out how to maintain those positions now the UK is no longer involved.
20% of Harris supporters put Biden as their second choice, 25% of Warren supporters put Sanders as their second choice. 20% of O'Rourke backers put Sanders as their second choice with 18% for Biden.
That suggests a clear divide is already emerging between Biden and to a lesser extent Harris on the centrist and moderate wing and Sanders and Warren on the populist left/liberal wing