Monday 9th May 2016

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:09 am

God moaning.

Well, he would be moaning if he saw the latest from a speech to be given by OGRPPFGTCC. It is all about how the UK is inextricably linked to Europe and apparently Slimy Dave will invoke the spirit of Churchill and the Romans.
This is how he will appeal to the hearts and minds of the electorate; it would appear that he's aiming for a bit of positive thinking after Gidiot insisted yesterday that Brexit would cause house prices to fall.
According to the execrable Heather Stewart, the G political editor responsible for many a thinly-veiled anti-Corbyn piece (which we are not allowed to comment on), Boris Johnson will make a speech today too - this one is going to make a "liberal and cosmopolitan" case for leaving the EU.

Stewart has a couple of articles on Labour/Corbyn - one on how Corbyn will attempt to unify his party and another on how Khan is distancing himself from Corbyn. She writes in a way that tries very hard not to admit that Labour actually did OK, briefly mentions in passing that the Tories didn't, and as ever cites the views of "sceptical" Labour MPs who she doesn't name.
To save her the trouble in future, here are the reasons why Corbyn is useless: He is "old fashioned", and he is "scruffy". He is "not a hit
with swing voters". He needs to heal the (wholly manufactured) "rift" with Sadiq Khan. He is damaged by McDonnell's spat with Flint.

FFS.

Post by **refitman** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:10 am

Morning all.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:20 am

Whoops!

I'v gorn and done it again - started a new topic at the same time as Mr.Refitman.......

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:22 am

Anyway.

Today is the start of the short campaign for the referendum.

What do you folks think will be the most ridiculous claim? (From either side)

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:53 am

Morning.

Have been listening to Radio 4 since before 7am.
No mention of the Bristol win.
If the situation had been reversed, and it was a Labour wipeout, I'm sure their editor would have noticed and invited a host of 'moderates' to cause trouble.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:55 am

Radio 4 did do a piece about a new Oxford study that rubbishes Tory claims about weekend deaths in the NHS.

Can't see a link to it on the BBC site, hopefully the Guardian will/have pick it up.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:59 am

ephemerid wrote:
What do you folks think will be the most ridiculous claim? (From either side)

Morning all. Here briefly before going to the library for another long day.

I think Cameron's won that just now with his absurd "This could mean war!".

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:15 am

Robinson nails Hammond. Beautiful.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:23 am

EU will further undermine British Sovereignty,
with new laws affecting parliamentary procedure.
Prime Ministers will be required to answer questions at PMQT, whilst maintaining a colour falling within an accepted range of variation from his/her normal base colour.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:24 am

Went to bed feeling warm & fuzzy about Bristol but have had some worries since.

Labour seem to have benefited at the cost of the Greens.
How many places [apart from Brighton, or maybe Stroud] would Labour be able to benefit from Green losses ?

UKIP have no presence in Bristol, unlike in Northern and Midland towns where Green voters are probably not so highly represented.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:27 am

Thanks for merging my mistake into the real thread, Refitman!

)

So far, we have for Remain - plummeting house prices, collapsing businesses, Churchill and the Romans would vote In, erm.....and war.

For Brexit, we have - take back control of our sovereignty, as many free trade deals as we fancy, and nearly zero immigration. And war.

Whatever we as a nation decide, it's war.

The question now appears to be this - will our brave lads and lasses fight alongside the non-existent EU Army or against it?

Worried, I am.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:27 am

Have just read that the ousted Bristol Green leader blamed 'the Corbyn effect'.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:33 am

I've got to go out soon as I have to have a blood test.
Sparrow's blog isn't yet open for comments. When it does open BTL can someone please ask him if the G is going to be arsed to report Bristol ?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:38 am

I wouldn't worry too much yahyah

If Corbyn is attracting (back?) voters who have been identifying more with the Greens that is a good thing for Labour nationwide. I think there have been sizeable Green votes elsewhere, but probably not as well organised and visible as in Brighton say.

I guess what we all hope is that we are seeing an end to the relentless drift to the right. If a newly social democratic Labour party is treading on the Greens' toes, the latter will have to become more radical themselves, which may be no bad thing. Here in Kirkless there are certainly Green votes to be won and I think Lib Dem votes to be won in this space too.

Of course Labour needs to win some votes back from the Tories and UKIP, but Ed M's narrative on workers rights, supporting small businesses rather than large corporations ought to play well there and indeed Corbyn is strong on this.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:44 am

tinybgoat wrote:EU will further undermine British Sovereignty,
with new laws affecting parliamentary procedure.
Prime Ministers will be required to answer questions at PMQT, whilst maintaining a colour falling within an accepted range of variation from his/her normal base colour.

I am liking this a lot, tinybgoat. A lot. Totes amaze, as Sam would say.

I am particularly entranced by the maintenance of acceptable variations of colour.

OGRPPFGTCC will have to restrict his apoplectic puce to a mildish crimson hue. Sort of Fuschia. Like Ms.Harman's little buses.
Baron Gidiot will have to be careful whilst gouching out on the front bench. Soggy parchment to wet dough. No whiter shade of pale.
Hammond will be OK. He is always and forever a greyish shade of Khaki. Not as yellow as his twin Mr.Burns, but close.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:44 am

Good morfternoon.

Laura Kuenssberg Verified account
‏@bbclaurak

David MIliband introducing the PM at this event - amazing venue of British Museum, audience full of diplomats (Politics Live, Guardian)

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:48 am

yahyah wrote:Went to bed feeling warm & fuzzy about Bristol but have had some worries since.

Labour seem to have benefited at the cost of the Greens.
How many places [apart from Brighton, or maybe Stroud] would Labour be able to benefit from Green losses ?

UKIP have no presence in Bristol, unlike in Northern and Midland towns where Green voters are probably not so highly represented.

I understand your concerns - but this chequered picture caused by a much more fragmented political picture than before - re parties, regions, local issues is why the 'centrist' one size fits all response can no longer be the go to solution - as Robert Snozers set out late last night. In this part of the UK we have Ukip on the rise and Plaid - two kinds of nationalism / identity politics. Bristol is, as you say, very different. We need very different responses in different areas - whilst having a clear overall vision for the country as a whole. It's going to be hard - big change required. We certainly can't get caught up in London or Cardiff centrism - that's the danger. I can also understand why more Labour MPs are coming round to seeing the need for a different voting system.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:49 am

PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.

Laura Kuenssberg Verified account
‏@bbclaurak

David MIliband introducing the PM at this event - amazing venue of British Museum, audience full of diplomats (Politics Live, Guardian)

So when will he do the decent thing and join the Tories?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:58 am

Andy Slaughter MP Retweeted
Rachel Logan ‏@rachelrlogan 35m35 minutes ago
Overall sense from reading Report of Lords' EU Cttee is that they think the proposals to replace Human Rights Act are bewilderingly poor

Andy Slaughter MP Retweeted
Rachel Logan ‏@rachelrlogan 55m55 minutes ago
Damning conclusion in report from EU Cttee of House of Lords - forcefully telling UK gov to rethink replacing #HRA http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 39/139.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Andy Slaughter MP Retweeted
Rachel Logan ‏@rachelrlogan 56m56 minutes ago
"Doubts about the wisdom of introducing a British Bill of Rights grew with each evidence session we held": EU Cttee http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 39/139.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:06 am

Chris Bryant MP ‏@RhonddaBryant 5m5 minutes ago
What a cheek! An unelected peer lecturing us about how party candidates are selected. And calling for end of political parties! @BBCr4today

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:06 am

He [David Cameron] says during the renegotiation he was often criticised for not saying explicitly he would back leaving the EU.(Politics Live, Guardian)

I thought he did say just that at one point - or am I mis-remembering?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:20 am

Kuensservatveberg - on Twitter.

"The PM suggests that leaving the EU would risk war. We ask the crucial question: would Corbyn winning the election be even more of a risk?"

"As the EU referendum debate hots up we examine why Tory divisions are very bad news indeed for Jeremy Corbyn"

(and in the studio to discuss all this, there's.....wait for it....John McTernan)

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:32 am

PorFavor wrote:
He [David Cameron] says during the renegotiation he was often criticised for not saying explicitly he would back leaving the EU.(Politics Live, Guardian)
I thought he did say just that at one point - or am I mis-remembering?

He wasn't explicit, Just didn't rule anything out.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... sy-EU.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -fail.html

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:34 am

@tinybgoat

Thank you!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:39 am

A referendum with the pm and chancellor on one side should be a reasonable way ahead in the polls when it comes to the short period? Dare I say the pressure would've been considerably more on Brown and Darling.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:42 am

yahyah wrote:Went to bed feeling warm & fuzzy about Bristol but have had some worries since.

Labour seem to have benefited at the cost of the Greens.
How many places [apart from Brighton, or maybe Stroud] would Labour be able to benefit from Green losses ?

UKIP have no presence in Bristol, unlike in Northern and Midland towns where Green voters are probably not so highly represented.

I don't want to take anything away from the Greens as they have made genuine inroads in Bristol and came away yesterday with a still respectable 6 seats, but the seats Labour picked up were really Libdems ones, who themselves used to win 30 plus seats in Bristol and even had overall control of the council back in 2009-2011. The Greens initially benefited a couple of years ago when the Libdem vote collapsed but they only held these seats for a relatively short length of time. The success in Bristol may be unique in some ways, but it shows a resurgence of trust in the party in an area that doesn't automatically vote Labour so has to be an encouraging sign that people are starting to be ready to give Labour another go.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:54 am

tinybgoat wrote:EU will further undermine British Sovereignty,
with new laws affecting parliamentary procedure.
Prime Ministers will be required to answer questions at PMQT, whilst maintaining a colour falling within an accepted range of variation from his/her normal base colour.

...and there will be an EU resolution to the effect that any politician daring to address the PM must wear a pinstripe suit and a tie.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:59 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
ephemerid wrote:Kuensservatveberg - on Twitter.

"The PM suggests that leaving the EU would risk war. We ask the crucial question: would Corbyn winning the election be even more of a risk?"

"As the EU referendum debate hots up we examine why Tory divisions are very bad news indeed for Jeremy Corbyn"

(and in the studio to discuss all this, there's.....wait for it....John McTernan)
I just had to go and double check that wasn't genuine...

She's obsessed.

It's worrying - is she actually unhinged on the subject of Corbyn, or a stooge for the right?

Either way, it's beyond a joke now.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:00 am

Eric_WLothian wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:EU will further undermine British Sovereignty,
with new laws affecting parliamentary procedure.
Prime Ministers will be required to answer questions at PMQT, whilst maintaining a colour falling within an accepted range of variation from his/her normal base colour.
...and there will be an EU resolution to the effect that any politician daring to address the PM must wear a pinstripe suit and a tie.

And they'll have to sing the National Anthem before they start...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:07 am

The moderates saying they agree with a big tent strategy. They'd be happy to become a member of the shadow cabinet?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:14 am

David Maddox Retweeted
UK News ‏@UK__News 28m28 minutes ago
David Cameron will not be taking part in EU referendum debates with Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, it has emerged.

No - he only wants to debate Farage apparently - doesn't want to be seen disagreeing with other members of his party ...

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:16 am

While David Cameron was delivering his speech, Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, was on the Today programme with a mop and bucket (misquoted from Politics Live, Guardian).

David Cameron is determined to repeat the resounding success of his part in the London mayoral campaign.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:21 am

Alex Wickham Retweeted
Chris Musson ‏@camusson 4m4 minutes ago
I understand @NatalieMcGarry has agreed to pay £10,000 to @scotlandinunion's Alastair Cameron for wrongly branding him a 'holocaust denier'

Good grief. Is she back in the SNP fold yet?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:31 am

Willow904 wrote:
yahyah wrote:Went to bed feeling warm & fuzzy about Bristol but have had some worries since.

Labour seem to have benefited at the cost of the Greens.
How many places [apart from Brighton, or maybe Stroud] would Labour be able to benefit from Green losses ?

UKIP have no presence in Bristol, unlike in Northern and Midland towns where Green voters are probably not so highly represented.
I don't want to take anything away from the Greens as they have made genuine inroads in Bristol and came away yesterday with a still respectable 6 seats, but the seats Labour picked up were really Libdems ones, who themselves used to win 30 plus seats in Bristol and even had overall control of the council back in 2009-2011. The Greens initially benefited a couple of years ago when the Libdem vote collapsed but they only held these seats for a relatively short length of time. The success in Bristol may be unique in some ways, but it shows a resurgence of trust in the party in an area that doesn't automatically vote Labour so has to be an encouraging sign that people are starting to be ready to give Labour another go.

Actually, the Greens ended up with 11 seats in Bristol - still the third biggest party ahead of the LibDems.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:29 am

Good-morning, everyone

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:32 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
yahyah wrote:Went to bed feeling warm & fuzzy about Bristol but have had some worries since.

Labour seem to have benefited at the cost of the Greens.
How many places [apart from Brighton, or maybe Stroud] would Labour be able to benefit from Green losses ?

UKIP have no presence in Bristol, unlike in Northern and Midland towns where Green voters are probably not so highly represented.
I don't want to take anything away from the Greens as they have made genuine inroads in Bristol and came away yesterday with a still respectable 6 seats, but the seats Labour picked up were really Libdems ones, who themselves used to win 30 plus seats in Bristol and even had overall control of the council back in 2009-2011. The Greens initially benefited a couple of years ago when the Libdem vote collapsed but they only held these seats for a relatively short length of time. The success in Bristol may be unique in some ways, but it shows a resurgence of trust in the party in an area that doesn't automatically vote Labour so has to be an encouraging sign that people are starting to be ready to give Labour another go.
Actually, the Greens ended up with 11 seats in Bristol - still the third biggest party ahead of the LibDems.

My apologies, I was going on memory, should have checked the final results. That just underlines that the Libdems were the real losers, doesn't it?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:33 am

Labour gained and all other parties were down

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:49 am

What will Boris Johnson's next grandstanding platform be (after the referendum)? Have you noticed that he always has the next thing to keep him in the spotlight lined up? I can't make up my mind if he is motivated by ambition, owerweening (and possibly pathological) vanity, or a mixture of both.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:51 am

From last night. @Howsillyofme

The media is completely biased against the Labour Party and that is why the Government can get away with the U-turns...where do you think most people will find out about this things if the media don't report them? It may help if Khan is on tv as much as Johnson was but do you think he will get the same exposure

Complaining about the press can sometimes be a cop-out but also pretending that lies and distortions don't is also one when used in a blanket fashion - how many votes were lost because of ant-semitism being all over the news but then remind me how much prominence Tory racism got?

I really don't understand why these results were so bad? The Tories were defending around 800 seats - do you think that Labour were going to win a few hundred of these.....?

Miliband won 820 seats and in 2016 800 of those were held, as well as 32 councils (1 lost, 1 gained) - if 2012 was a success then why is 2016 a massive failure?

The Tories also lost seats when 2012 was their low point in the polls - how does this translate as good for them

No-one here is claiming it is a massive success but your arguments for it being bad are weak and are not supported by the numbers and the results. Corbyn was laughed at this week for saying he wouldn't lose seats, and the pundits (and you I seem to remember) were expecting at least 150 seats lost, and hoping for more (I expect knowing the media that they said 150 expecting a lot more so to portray it as a real disaster). As you were wrong you then try to move the goalposts

Turnout was very low in many places. Reading's was around 33% I believe.
Difficult to judge where votes will go I should have thought?

And I keep saying it. What about election fraud? You can't predict future results, from what might be an invalid result can you? Shouldn't 2015 be left out of the equation?

GetYou · Post by **GetYou** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:52 am

You always hear them arguing – you always hear something on the news, oh his followers are not following him any more and not bowing down because he said this about his mate’s shoes or something. But that’s how it comes across. They’re always falling out with each other

There's a bit more detail than the G article here
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/j ... _hp_ref=uk

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:54 am

PorFavor wrote:What will Boris Johnson's next grandstanding platform be (after the referendum)? Have you noticed that he always has the next thing to keep him in the spotlight lined up? I can't make up my mind if he is motivated by ambition, owerweening (and possibly pathological) vanity, or a mixture of both.

Both. With an extra dose of lust, greed, and psychopathy thrown in.

If Cameron is now seriously saying that we are at more risk of war if we leave the EU, why did he decide to have a referendum?
He has virtually admitted to putting the country at risk of conflict.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:58 am

Further to howsillyofme's post and media bias.

Went on a picnic with our son on Saturday. Started talking about elections. He's not that into politics, but is aware of a lot that goes on and will often mention something the government has or hasn't done, especially Military matters.
I mentioned election fraud. He thought I meant the missing ballot slips from the 2015 GE.
I said no, the election expenses investigation...He was shocked. It was the first he'd heard of it.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:11 pm

Jess Phillips has now decided that people getting stroppy with Laura Kuenssberg (male or female) are guilty of institutional sexism.

She also announced that this institutional sexism is so rife that it's "unconscious" and the people doing it "don't even know they are perpetrators"

People have been pointing out to her that when Nick Robinson had her job he got a lot of stick too. Her answer to that is "...the froth and fever she faces has unconscious gender tone and motive".

Crikey!

So if I have a pop at Nick Robinson or Brillo-Pad Neill or John Pienaar, I'm allowed to say that I think they're prats with a rightie agenda.
If I have a pop at Laura Kuenssberg for the same reasons, I am demonstrating institutionalised sexism but I don't know I'm doing it.

Is it me?????

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:18 pm

I'm happy with the current Labour party leader, with Khan and his election as Mayor of London and pleased enough with Labour's
recent election results. I like most Labour leadership at all levels. I like the Labour party members I know.

I'm usually unable to untangle the difference between genuine friction between Labour leadership from manufactured mischief
making from those who don't care about the Labour party's existence at all.

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:21 pm

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Have been listening to Radio 4 since before 7am.
No mention of the Bristol win.
If the situation had been reversed, and it was a Labour wipeout, I'm sure their editor would have noticed and invited a host of 'moderates' to cause trouble.

Afternoon.

@yahyah, the BBC local news didn't report the Bristol Council elections, though they did mention Marvin Rees' election as mayor & managed to get a snide aside about Corbyn into the report. Lead story was a massive fire in Lechlade (no injuries), then the mayor, then Bristol Rovers being promoted (of particular interest to one 'Nester in particular

)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:26 pm

Q: George Osborne says the next Tory leader will have to be serious, sober and principled. Do you agree?

Johnson says he is glad to hear Osborne is principled.

Meow!

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:28 pm

Eph.Mysteriously,she is" exempt".

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:31 pm

danesclose wrote:
yahyah wrote:Morning.

Have been listening to Radio 4 since before 7am.
No mention of the Bristol win.
If the situation had been reversed, and it was a Labour wipeout, I'm sure their editor would have noticed and invited a host of 'moderates' to cause trouble.
Afternoon.

@yahyah, the BBC local news didn't report the Bristol Council elections, though they did mention Marvin Rees' election as mayor & managed to get a snide aside about Corbyn into the report. Lead story was a massive fire in Lechlade (no injuries), then the mayor, then Bristol Rovers being promoted (of particular interest to one 'Nester in particular )

Correct - the only place on the BBC I found reference to Bristol was the on the results page a couple days old, this one:

England Council Elections 2016

Elections were held in 124 English councils on 5 May 2016. Seat change is based on previous comparable election results.
NOC: No Overall Control

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Itty–bitty sidebar on that page readers must scroll through to get at the following:

Council A-Z

Bristol
LAB GAIN FROM NOC

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:34 pm

Jess Phillips sees institutional sexism in absolutely everything tbf

Actually I don't dislike her as much as certain others - annoying as she can be I think she is primarily motivated by a desire to see Labour win.

And not, in contrast to all too many, "victory" for their own internal faction at almost any cost.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 09 May, 2016 12:42 pm

If (according to Boris Johnson) our leaving the EU will allow it, by virtue of our wonderful foresight and benificence, to become some sort of paradise, will we be seeking to rejoin this model of perfection? If not, why not?

And - Boris Johnson's speech was rambling and incoherent. It is only the précis (and it's more a translation than a précis) kindly presented by the media bods that renders it comprehensible and coherent to any but the most die-hard of Boris Johnson fans. Why do they (the media) afford him this (tax-payer funded, in the case of the BBC) service?

Edited to add a bit - which doesn't affect the original meaning.