No doubt the Niggle will align himself with Cruella's party, when that Avatar of Sauron reveals herself in her true colours - although some might say that she's doing that right now, at the clusterfuck...
No doubt the Niggle will align himself with Cruella's party, when that Avatar of Sauron reveals herself in her true colours - although some might say that she's doing that right now, at the clusterfuck...
I suppose if you're going to adopt all Farage's policies you might as well have him on the inside of the tent pissing out. On the other hand if I were Sunak and let Farage in I'd be very wary of letting him stand behind me. Chap's never liked being second fiddle.
Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown...and the same might apply to Cruella, if she achieves mastery of the nasty party, with Niggle perhaps (as you say) standing behind her.
I suspect the Garbage has fatter fish to fry than worrying about joining the sinking tory ship.
Any PM with a shred of decency and integrity would give her the Order Of The Boot immediately, but no, not Wishi-Washi Short-Pants Sushi. She says what he dare not say, so yellow-bellied is he.
Cruella is ISTM a truly evil and wicked person. I now await a response from her fluffers.
Even if we achieve net zero in the UK, things are going to get difficult in hotter countries. If I lived in one of them, I would also want to emigrate to a cooler country.
Even if we achieve net zero in the UK, things are going to get difficult in hotter countries. If I lived in one of them, I would also want to emigrate to a cooler country.
So how would you suggest we keep these climate refugees out, if that's what you think we should do?
She's marginally worse than previous home secretaries, and this time the press affects to notice -- possibly because she's just too gauche for their tastes and they have a shiny new bauble to distract them.
Whereas it was previously fine to talk about 'citizens of nowhere' and everyone affected not to notice the fash/anti-Semitic connotations.
She's marginally worse than previous home secretaries, and this time the press affects to notice -- possibly because she's just too gauche for their tastes and they have a shiny new bauble to distract them.
Whereas it was previously fine to talk about 'citizens of nowhere' and everyone affected not to notice the fash/anti-Semitic connotations.
Apparently the BoD met with her after her "cultural marxism" comments and are completely reassured that there was nothing anti-semitic about them.
She's marginally worse than previous home secretaries, and this time the press affects to notice -- possibly because she's just too gauche for their tastes and they have a shiny new bauble to distract them.
Whereas it was previously fine to talk about 'citizens of nowhere' and everyone affected not to notice the fash/anti-Semitic connotations.
She's marginally worse than previous home secretaries, and this time the press affects to notice -- possibly because she's just too gauche for their tastes and they have a shiny new bauble to distract them.
Whereas it was previously fine to talk about 'citizens of nowhere' and everyone affected not to notice the fash/anti-Semitic connotations.
Apparently the BoD met with her after her "cultural marxism" comments and are completely reassured that there was nothing anti-semitic about them.
He's a career politician, and needs to be centre of attention and preferably voted into some position where he can claim widespread support for his policies. He's tried getting elected by setting up his own parties, but his only route to being elected (as a member of the European Parliament) has been taken away from him. Latching on leach* like to the corpse of the Conservative Party is the only slim chance he has of succeeding in being elected again.
* with apologies to all leaches for making it sound like they're not infinitely more worthy of respect than him.
Even if we achieve net zero in the UK, things are going to get difficult in hotter countries. If I lived in one of them, I would also want to emigrate to a cooler country.
So how would you suggest we keep these climate refugees out, if that's what you think we should do?
I do not believe that we should allow unrestricted migration. Do you believe that we should welcome anybody and everybody ?
Never mind what I believe - answer my question, please. You may well be right about increasing numbers of climate refugees, so what could or should be done about them?
Never mind what I believe - answer my question, please. You may well be right about increasing numbers of climate refugees, so what could or should be done about them?
Two ways of not solving the refugee crisis are:
- to drastically reduce overseas aid
- to run a contemptibly inadequate and cruel asylum system
Sadly, that seems to be government policy. It drums up hate against an othered group, to divert the suffering people from the real cause of their problems - the current shoddy government, who is now prepared to let the living as well as the dead pile high in their thousands.
Even if we achieve net zero in the UK, things are going to get difficult in hotter countries. If I lived in one of them, I would also want to emigrate to a cooler country.
So how would you suggest we keep these climate refugees out, if that's what you think we should do?
I do not believe that we should allow unrestricted migration. Do you believe that we should welcome anybody and everybody ?
... It would be a shame if the Conservatives no longer had the money to pay others to campaign, and had to start relying on members and volunteers to go out and talk to people to get votes.
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
Never mind what I believe - answer my question, please. You may well be right about increasing numbers of climate refugees, so what could or should be done about them?
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
After Channel 4’s (apparently pretty accurate) docudrama about partygate making it clear how contemptuous they were about their actions, I would bet there are plenty of abominable indiscretions in the ‘lost’ WhatsApp messages.
Never mind what I believe - answer my question, please. You may well be right about increasing numbers of climate refugees, so what could or should be done about them?
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
After Channel 4’s (apparently pretty accurate) docudrama about partygate making it clear how contemptuous they were about their actions, I would bet there are plenty of abominable indiscretions in the ‘lost’ WhatsApp messages.
Yes, that's very much what I meant. Can WhatsApp messages be retrieved, even though they seem to have gone for ever?
Never mind what I believe - answer my question, please. You may well be right about increasing numbers of climate refugees, so what could or should be done about them?
Still waiting for your answer.
Enjoy the wait.
No problem. It was my fault for asking you a difficult question.
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
After Channel 4’s (apparently pretty accurate) docudrama about partygate making it clear how contemptuous they were about their actions, I would bet there are plenty of abominable indiscretions in the ‘lost’ WhatsApp messages.
Yes, that's very much what I meant. Can WhatsApp messages be retrieved, even though they seem to have gone for ever?
They may be in another person's phone, but otherwise no, as I understand it. I imagine those that have not so far 'lost' or 'changed' their phones are now busy doing so.
Some other apps (like Signal) also have an auto delete function which can be set to make messages disappear after a certain time. That's probably a popular setting in government circles, I imagine.
Going back to the WhatsApp stuff. It occurs to me that many bad (and some good) decisions were made during the Covid era and seeing the messages would help explain them. So if someone can't find them all we have to go on when judging them is the actions taken. In other words they have missed out on a chance to plead extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the messages are so awful that somehow they would make our opinion of them even worse.
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
After Channel 4’s (apparently pretty accurate) docudrama about partygate making it clear how contemptuous they were about their actions, I would bet there are plenty of abominable indiscretions in the ‘lost’ WhatsApp messages.
Yes, that's very much what I meant. Can WhatsApp messages be retrieved, even though they seem to have gone for ever?
They may be in another person's phone, but otherwise no, as I understand it. I imagine those that have not so far 'lost' or 'changed' their phones are now busy doing so.
Some other apps (like Signal) also have an auto delete function which can be set to make messages disappear after a certain time. That's probably a popular setting in government circles, I imagine.
I note that Mr Sunak’s justification for his smoking legislation plan is that there is “no safe amount”
So why not ban it outright then? Could it be because certain ministers and entryists are rather fond of cigars (with their booze)?
Or is it another case of preferential rights for older people (like voter ID)?
Probably also: Tories cannot afford to lose the vote of the capstan full strength gammon brigade.
Also, there is no safe amount of alcohol consumption - so can we expect Mr Sunak to take action on that front too?
I note that Mr Sunak’s justification for his smoking legislation plan is that there is “no safe amount”
So why not ban it outright then? Could it be because certain ministers and entryists are rather fond of cigars (with their booze)?
Or is it another case of preferential rights for older people (like voter ID)?
Probably also: Tories cannot afford to lose the vote of the capstan full strength gammon brigade.
Also, there is no safe amount of alcohol consumption - so can we expect Mr Sunak to take action on that front too?
I think you may have missed Tory party donors, how ever indirect from your list
The time saving on the HS2 journey - if it went the whole way - from Birmingham to Euston would be 30 minutes.
The latest smart move from Mr Sunak today is to announce that HS2 won't make it to Euston unless someone else pays for it.
That means it would terminate at Old Oak Common instead. The fastest way to get from Old Oak Common to Euston is by public transport, but the fastest route takes 28 minutes.
A potential saving of a whole 2 minutes on a journey, for about £50bn!
But of course the connections between the two routes are not likely to join up neatly, so in practice the HS2 line will be a slower route to central London than the regular west coast main line.
Yes, the point about private money needed to get to Euston is both amusing, and unsurprising. How often do the Tories make a splash announcement, followed up by a big raspberry? But then we keep voting them in
Yes, the point about private money needed to get to Euston is both amusing, and unsurprising. How often do the Tories make a splash announcement, followed up by a big raspberry? But then we keep voting them in
Who's your 'we' in this sentence?
'We' = a group of people that includes oneself. Do you repeatedly vote for them? Do you think the majority of people on this thread do? I don't get that impression.
Yes, the point about private money needed to get to Euston is both amusing, and unsurprising. How often do the Tories make a splash announcement, followed up by a big raspberry? But then we keep voting them in
Who's your 'we' in this sentence?
'We' = a group of people that includes oneself. Do you repeatedly vote for them? Do you think the majority of people on this thread do? I don't get that impression.
I assumed the "we" was the UK voting public as a whole.
I assumed the "we" was the UK voting public as a whole.
Since 56.4% of those who voted in the last election - even ignoring those who didn't vote - chose candidates of other parties, it's neither fair, nor reasonable to the rest of 'us' to speak of 'we' voting them in.
I, for one, don't identify any commonality between, 'me' and either the UK government or its electorate, and don't acknowledge any such identity. I won't unless or until the electoral system is redesigned to ensure that the government that is elected is representative of those who elect it, and there is some recognition that government owes duties to all its electorate and not just its own supporters.
Until such time, if that's a use anyone is making of 'we', include me out.
I assumed the "we" was the UK voting public as a whole.
Since 56.4% of those who voted in the last election - even ignoring those who didn't vote - chose candidates of other parties, it's neither fair, nor reasonable to the rest of 'us' to speak of 'we' voting them in.
I, for one, don't identify any commonality between, 'me' and either the UK government or its electorate, and don't acknowledge any such identity. I won't unless or until the electoral system is redesigned to ensure that the government that is elected is representative of those who elect it, and there is some recognition that government owes duties to all its electorate and not just its own supporters.
Until such time, if that's a use anyone is making of 'we', include me out.
If you are a member of a committee, you attend meetings and make decisions. Often the decision is split with not averyone voting for the proposal. However, the result is described as a committee decision.
Massively bad result for the Conservatives tonight, from 15% in 2019 to less than 4% and £500 lost.
I suspect that most people will be reporting a massive win for Labour and a massive loss for the SNP
It is an embarrassment for the SNP and will cheer Labour. It is probably too large a margin to attribute solely to local issues. It also suggests that what the tories have to worry about most in Scotland is that their voters stay at home, and that is particularly troubling as tory voters are usually more reliable. Labour's victory comes on the back of fewer votes than they got in the last two general elections because of the low turnout.
The SNP collapse and Labour gains (even if that's more about getting people to vote rather than switching vote) is the big story, and for Scotland probably more important - come the general election, will we still have a majority of MPs for the SNP or can Labour pull back a good chunk of their vote share and return double figure number of MPs, it's very unlikely Conservatives will have a big share of MPs. And, the by-election result hasn't changed that question, it just illustrates the possible results.
The focus on Labour and SNP is good news for the Conservatives, because it draws attention away from their vote collapse.
There's only a handful of Westminster constituencies in Scotland that the Conservatives have even an outside chance of winning, irrespective of how much further the SNP collapses. A dozen or so that Labour are very likely to win at the next election, thanks to the issues in the SNP, maybe more like 30-40 if the SNP doesn't sort itself out.
But, this is a thread about Conservatives. If they wanted to maximise their chances of a majority in Westminster then their best move would have been to grant a Scottish independence referendum and hope for a Yes victory. Scotland isn't going to give them the seats they need for a majority, but could very easily give Labour the seats they need.
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/03/sunak-refuses-to-rule-out-welcoming-farage-back-into-tory-party
No doubt the Niggle will align himself with Cruella's party, when that Avatar of Sauron reveals herself in her true colours - although some might say that she's doing that right now, at the clusterfuck...
I suppose if you're going to adopt all Farage's policies you might as well have him on the inside of the tent pissing out. On the other hand if I were Sunak and let Farage in I'd be very wary of letting him stand behind me. Chap's never liked being second fiddle.
I suspect the Garbage has fatter fish to fry than worrying about joining the sinking tory ship.
Oh indeed he will. Mind you, so did Mussolini in 1930-40s Italian history.
So he will, as will other equally useless boils on the arse of humanity. No doubt you can think of some, as can I.
Not very far into the 40s, it has to be said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/03/suella-braverman-claims-hurricane-of-mass-migration-coming-to-uk
Read and weep.
Any PM with a shred of decency and integrity would give her the Order Of The Boot immediately, but no, not Wishi-Washi Short-Pants Sushi. She says what he dare not say, so yellow-bellied is he.
Cruella is ISTM a truly evil and wicked person. I now await a response from her fluffers.
So how would you suggest we keep these climate refugees out, if that's what you think we should do?
She's marginally worse than previous home secretaries, and this time the press affects to notice -- possibly because she's just too gauche for their tastes and they have a shiny new bauble to distract them.
Whereas it was previously fine to talk about 'citizens of nowhere' and everyone affected not to notice the fash/anti-Semitic connotations.
Apparently the BoD met with her after her "cultural marxism" comments and are completely reassured that there was nothing anti-semitic about them.
Good point.
O well, that's all right, then.
* with apologies to all leaches for making it sound like they're not infinitely more worthy of respect than him.
Question answered. Your turn
- to drastically reduce overseas aid
- to run a contemptibly inadequate and cruel asylum system
Sadly, that seems to be government policy. It drums up hate against an othered group, to divert the suffering people from the real cause of their problems - the current shoddy government, who is now prepared to let the living as well as the dead pile high in their thousands.
Yes
The impression given is that They are afraid that the messages will indeed make our opinion of Them even worse than it already is.
After Channel 4’s (apparently pretty accurate) docudrama about partygate making it clear how contemptuous they were about their actions, I would bet there are plenty of abominable indiscretions in the ‘lost’ WhatsApp messages.
Enjoy the wait.
Yes, that's very much what I meant. Can WhatsApp messages be retrieved, even though they seem to have gone for ever?
They may be in another person's phone, but otherwise no, as I understand it. I imagine those that have not so far 'lost' or 'changed' their phones are now busy doing so.
Some other apps (like Signal) also have an auto delete function which can be set to make messages disappear after a certain time. That's probably a popular setting in government circles, I imagine.
Thanks!
So why not ban it outright then? Could it be because certain ministers and entryists are rather fond of cigars (with their booze)?
Or is it another case of preferential rights for older people (like voter ID)?
Probably also: Tories cannot afford to lose the vote of the capstan full strength gammon brigade.
Also, there is no safe amount of alcohol consumption - so can we expect Mr Sunak to take action on that front too?
I think you may have missed Tory party donors, how ever indirect from your list
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mtp2-PEH20
The latest smart move from Mr Sunak today is to announce that HS2 won't make it to Euston unless someone else pays for it.
That means it would terminate at Old Oak Common instead. The fastest way to get from Old Oak Common to Euston is by public transport, but the fastest route takes 28 minutes.
A potential saving of a whole 2 minutes on a journey, for about £50bn!
But of course the connections between the two routes are not likely to join up neatly, so in practice the HS2 line will be a slower route to central London than the regular west coast main line.
You couldn't make it up.
'We' = a group of people that includes oneself. Do you repeatedly vote for them? Do you think the majority of people on this thread do? I don't get that impression.
I assumed the "we" was the UK voting public as a whole.
I, for one, don't identify any commonality between, 'me' and either the UK government or its electorate, and don't acknowledge any such identity. I won't unless or until the electoral system is redesigned to ensure that the government that is elected is representative of those who elect it, and there is some recognition that government owes duties to all its electorate and not just its own supporters.
Until such time, if that's a use anyone is making of 'we', include me out.
If you are a member of a committee, you attend meetings and make decisions. Often the decision is split with not averyone voting for the proposal. However, the result is described as a committee decision.
I suspect that most people will be reporting a massive win for Labour and a massive loss for the SNP
It is an embarrassment for the SNP and will cheer Labour. It is probably too large a margin to attribute solely to local issues. It also suggests that what the tories have to worry about most in Scotland is that their voters stay at home, and that is particularly troubling as tory voters are usually more reliable. Labour's victory comes on the back of fewer votes than they got in the last two general elections because of the low turnout.
The focus on Labour and SNP is good news for the Conservatives, because it draws attention away from their vote collapse.
The Bad Jokes thread is in Heaven.
There's only a handful of Westminster constituencies in Scotland that the Conservatives have even an outside chance of winning, irrespective of how much further the SNP collapses. A dozen or so that Labour are very likely to win at the next election, thanks to the issues in the SNP, maybe more like 30-40 if the SNP doesn't sort itself out.
But, this is a thread about Conservatives. If they wanted to maximise their chances of a majority in Westminster then their best move would have been to grant a Scottish independence referendum and hope for a Yes victory. Scotland isn't going to give them the seats they need for a majority, but could very easily give Labour the seats they need.
However, with any luck, the tories are so far down the toilet now that that ghastly scenario will not happen...said he, hopefully...