From the front page of the BBC website. Obviously they are hiding this stuff in full view again .Quote:
Originally Posted by Diclonius
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50572454
Printable View
From the front page of the BBC website. Obviously they are hiding this stuff in full view again .Quote:
Originally Posted by Diclonius
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50572454
Including the usual Kuenssberg pro-Tory angle, which is certainly never hidden.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
It's on the front page but it isn't the top story was what I was implying.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
To be fair, it’s only just been released by Labour so all media outlets will be playing catch up trying to read it. It’s a pretty big leak right in the middle of an election campaign.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It will take time to find all the little gems in it.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...b74a82012f.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I'm not clear what you think this means.
It means the Americans will be pushing us towards no deal as it helps them.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If the UK has no commitment to alignment with EU standards then everything can be dropped to the lowest common denominator. The Brexiteers' wet dream.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Yes but neither of these things means that the NHS is up for grabs. It may be up for grabs - may be, though I doubt that very much - but this isn't evidence of it. Not even the current mentalist version of the Tories is politically suicidal enough to attempt to dismantle the NHS.
These are minutes summarising the negotiating position being taken by the US side.
Truss's response: Corbyn is lying about what's in the documents because he's an anti-Semite.
The NHS is just a political soundbite hook to hang it on (although US healthcare providers will want in to the UK where they can get in), the implications of a US-UK deal are much more wide ranging. The UK side will be desperate for a trade "win" and dwarfed by the economic might of the US. It will cause a degradation of rights and protections for consumers, workers, the environment, etc etc across the board in all sorts of ways. ****** great if you're a small state, low regulation, worker squeezing Tory ******* though. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
She's not even trying to hide her bias now. The only thing she hates more than the Labour Party is the SNP.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
If it was not on the table then it would say so on page 1 of this document. The fact that these documents cover 6 meetings and they are still talking about the NHS means it is most definitely not off the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In what way was it biased to ask whether the documents actually provide any evidence that the governement has offered the NHS for sale as part of a trade deal? The fact Corbyn was unable to answer that inidcates that while there might have been all sorts of issues discussed around trade post-Brexit with the US (and the documents apparently emcompass a great deal more than just the NHS) there not any evidence of such an agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Not surprising Labour are trying to steer the conversation back in this direction after yesterday's fiasco mind you.
I watched a bit of the SNP manifesto launch. What struck me was how scathing she is about Corbyn and described choosing between him and Johnson as as choice between "the devil and the deep blue sea". If she regards him with such disdain why keep pursuing the possibility of supporting Labour in government? Would she really trust him to back down on independence in the unlikely event he was to become PM?
That post is an absolute disgrace.Quote:
Originally Posted by southsider
Of course there is no agreement but it is being discussed. That can’t be denied. The NHS is on the table in our trade deal with the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why are Jewish brits responsible for Israel?Quote:
Originally Posted by southsider
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Really? Show some evidence of that then.
Indeed. Not even Israeli Jews are responsible for the actions of the state of Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The evidence is there in the documents. It is being discussed by the negotiating teams. If something is off the table then you refuse to discuss it. They haven’t.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I really don't think it is there in the documents. If it was then presumably it would be available far and wide on social media and elsewhere?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
"Jeremy Corbyn doesn't provide evidence ministers have agreed the health service should be part of a trade deal with US."Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
Did he claim that they had? Perhaps they were all simply discussing Uganda at the six meetings. :dunno:
How do you know that Jewish people are not among those who are protesting Isreal? Do you maybe want them to wear a badge so you can identify them?Quote:
Originally Posted by southsider
Anti-semitism seems to be tolerated here as much as in the Labour Party these days.[emoji849]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, the SNP Manifesto launch was. Given that the story had only just broken that seems fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diclonius
When somebody makes clearly anti-semitic remarks they will not be tolerated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
**** me, mate. Been out on the streets, been producing documentary photography, been standing shoulder to shoulder with Palestinians. I just don't broadcast my Jewish background. Like thousands of others. You really need to sort out your criticism of folks that happen to be Jewish. The chief rabbi is doing what he's doing because he's a tory. Never forget.Quote:
Originally Posted by southsider
Sent from my Redmi 5 Plus using Tapatalk
[emoji122]Quote:
Originally Posted by HNA12
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As somebody else has pointed out these documents are effectively minutes of what the Americans have thrown into the mix. That doesn't mean what they might want is actually 'on the table'. Johnson (who can also, as far as I can see, also point to the fact these meetings took place before he was PM) can (and already has) said the NHS won't be on the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Labour will, understandably, do their damnedest to spin this as the NHS being up for sale but unless some concrete evidence of that comes to light it's primarily a scare tactic rather than a bombshell revelation. It's not as though these meetings were held in secret.
6 meetings and not once did anyone from the UK negotiating team take the NHS off the table. It’s still there. It’s up for negotiation.Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Labour explicitly state on their Facebook page that 'Boris Johnson has put the NHS up for sale'. It's quite a stretch to come to that conclusion based on today's 'evidence'.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
'The nice guy narrative is now officially dead':
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-interview-andrew-neil-general-election-labour-antisemitism-a9219226.html
He's being crucified for his performance. It was bad, no question, but Neil simply refused to allow Corbyn to say anything beyond a soundbite answer. Neil ruined the interview with his constant interruptions. He didn't listen to any of the replies but merely jumped in immediately.Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
Have you read the 1944 White Paper?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
The BBC's Adam Fleming has the following highlight from the doc:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKY1STTW...g&name=900x900
SPS is basically agricultural standards (sanitary and phytosanitary measures). Labour should be bigging up this stuff as well as the NHS imo.
That wasn't a Conservative government but a national coalition during war. The Conservative Party voted against the creation of the NHS between 1945 and 1947 and supported the BMA in their initial opposition. The Tories have opposed almost every piece of post war progressive legislation, from the NHS and the welfare state to a minimum wage and Working Families Tax Credits. They have never been ideologically supportive of the system. When Thatcher was talked out of privatising the NHS, she starved it of funds and created the internal market, in an attempt to destroy it from within. They've never changed. Let's not re-write history that the Tories supported the great reforms of the Attlee government; they did not. This notion of a post war consensus isn't true; the two main parties were miles apart in their vision of society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
I don't see it as being a key electoral issue except in the sense that it reflects badly on Corbyn for not having sorted it out years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
As to the great British public and their attitudes in general. your guess is as good as mine but the Brexit referendum result would suggest a certain antipathy towards foreigners among large sections of the community - mostly in England I would hazard.
Whether that indicates a tolerance of racism I really don't know.
Is Johnson refusing to appear with Neil?
Not refusing (yet), the BBC are in discussions with his team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Pol ed of LBC, Theo Usherwood tweets:
Quote:
Labour source tells me BBC informed them Boris Johnson would do an Andrew Neil interview next week.
Turns out no such agreement had been reached.
If Tory leader isn't subjected to same scrutiny as Mr Corbyn, but his team was told he would be, that's a problem for the BBC.
That's going to be the most predictable interview in TV history.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
"Well Andrew we've just got to get Brexit done"
"But Mr Johnson I'm not asking you about Brexit"
"Yes but Andrew we've got to get Brexit done"
"But I'm not asking you about Brexit"
"But the most important thing is that we get Brexit done"
"Yes you've said that a number of times, we get that, but what I'm asking you is … "
repeat for 30 mins.
As has been pointed out these documents have been available to anyone online for more than two months so if there had been more to 'expose' than Channel 4 did about these meetings it seems pretty obvious somebody would have done so by now. For Labour to claim they've 'unearthed' some sort of shattering new evidence smacks of desperation.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Other than the knowledge of the power of social media to twist public opinion to their own agenda, I think most politicians are totally ignorant of what materials are available on the internetQuote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
What's happened to tonight's scheduled interview?
Rumour Dominic Cummings has resigned.
J
https://twitter.com/hashtag/AndrewNe...rview?src=trenQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
That's a scandal if he doenst front upQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
Big poll out tonight which should show if tactical voting is likely to be a big factor. Huge data sample (200k I think). Should show individual constituencies. Out at 10pm.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:hyper and :worried:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Where are you getting that from?
Our latest #GE2019* Westminster voting intention on behalf of the @Telegraph
CON 41% (-1)
LAB 34% (+2)
LD 13% (+1)
BRX 5% (-)
Other 7% (-)
25th - 26th Nov
(changes from Savanta ComRes/Sunday Express poll, Nov 23rd)
bit.ly/2Djw3VT
It’s the yougov mrp, best performing poll model in 2017.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glory Lurker
Early leaks to journalists are supposedly saying a Tory majority of about 55 seats.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How utterly depressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Is that relevant?Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
It will be interesting but some caveats apply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
That sample is still only 300 people per constituency. I do the online YouGov polls and I am not sure that they are as sophisticated enough to tackle individual constituencies based on what I get asked, though they may be sampling in a different way. PopulusLive seem to be more forensic, though they are pretty ruthless in screening demographically, and I am not convinced that doesn’t skew things either.
Saying all that I have a relatively limited understanding of survey methods and statistical analysis. I think the results might point to some very broad trends but I would be hesitant of reading too much into them this far out from Election Day.
Especially this week when Labour have offered the waspi women £20k each. That would be enough to buy a lot of votes. Polls do appear to be narrowing and the data from this poll will be about a week old.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Seemingly it came out a week before the election last time round. Hopefully polls continue to narrow over the next two weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...77787449a0.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My Mum is of that age bracket and missed out by a couple of months, she pished herself laughing at claim they will be able to do this and she is politically fairly neutralQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Decent result for snp.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That would involve more than an acceptable amount of Tory seats surviving in Scotland (acceptable amount is of course zero!).Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
Only two Scottish Tories losing seats in the model. Hopefully they can be wiped out up here again come election day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
What good will it do if the Tory majority is as big as is being projected. Basically, Scotland is ****ed. Pulled out of Europe against her will and being dictated to by yetQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
another Tory **** for christ knows how long. I am in a fortunate position financially but genuinely worry for those who struggle to make ends meet. This bunch of right wing *******s care for nobody but themselves.
The you gov poll is a bit out of date and shows a Tory lead of 11 points. More recent polls this week show that lead down to about 7pts so it’s possible that this majority won’t happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
Can check your constituency here, Edinburgh West is quite the knife edge.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...fc7c6f7573.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...278585c445.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...884173dbb8.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Can't possibly just be me that thinks thats the worst map of Scotland ever created :faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
What's happened to the Greens? Only one seat? I'm very surprised at that.
Jo Swinson has a 5% lead, she could be up for a Portillo moment (again).
Yeah and it turns out to be closer to 150 people per constituency. Like you say it isn’t current data and based on a question of who you would vote for ‘today’.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Much room for twists and turns and certainly a good few news cycles to accommodate gamechanging moments.
Only 3 changes in London and in Corbyn central Labour increasing their vote. No Libdem breakthrough as their vote seems to have collapsed.
First Past the Post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankhfc
J
There's so many marginals in Scotland it's going to be hard to predict what actually happens on the day.
I think the Tory vote is holding up north of the border in the north and south, beyond Murray Labour aren't holding on to anything, will be interesting to see how the SNP / Lib Dem marginals of Caithness and North East Fife go.
Tories are going balls to the walls with the "no2indyref2" campaign, nothing else north of the border from them apart from that.
How many seats do they SNP need to be allowed to thibk about indyref again?
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
From today's Guardian story announcing a late shift in strategy by Labour in the wake of the latest polls:Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
"Labour canvassers have been reporting that Jeremy Corbyn's leadership has come up time and again on the doorstep."
My sister lives in Ian Murray's constituency and told me that they had Labour canvassers at the door a couple of nights ago. When she said Corbyn was putting her off voting Labour they told her not to worry about that because he wasn't going to win and that they hoped she would simply vote for Murray as a good local MP!
LOL, what a message that is [emoji23][emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by G B Young
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
What a toley. He is using the support of the party machine, whilst briefing against the party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Callum_62
Corbyn employed that very tactic for years in his constituency campaigning when New Labour was a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataplana
I hope the people in England who lean towards the Labour Party are bringing their memberships up to date because there will be leadership campaign after the election and how it goes could finish the Labour Party for good if they go full communist again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I saw a large banner in a field near Blair Atholl which was just vote, the name of the candidate, to stop indyref2. No mention of the party.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
Again? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Hes not too popular with the electorate either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Oh they had this crazy idea about fairer distribution of wealth at one point. I can see where he's coming from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...b176d29cfe.png
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Straight from Corbyn's Islington playbook of decades then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cataplana
I don't think these polls should be broadcast by the likes of the BBC. They should be reporting on what has happened rather than speculating on what might happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye
Quote:
Originally Posted by Callum_62
The issue for them is more likey to be how many seats they need to create an earthquake big enough to give them some cover for when the trial starts in March.
There's not going to by an Indyref2 next year regardless of the result. SNP senior figures don't want one next year because they don't believe they can win it then. What they want is a result that allows them to demand Indyref2, not get it and then spend a few years nursing Scottish grievance about not getting one. Their preferred second run at it is after the next Scottish Parliament elections.
I'm loving the ludicrous briefing given to the media for today by Labour on their 'campaign relaunch'. Essentially, "the public hasn't been listening to us properly so we're going to tell them the same things in a different way". Plus more Jeremy. Oh and Ian Lavery (who?) being sent to key seats.
Quite incredible that the hard left have ****ed this so badly - again - that they are already preparing the ground for the post election explanation of how another catastophic failure isn't Corbyn's/their fault. Another Tory government for the worst off, gift wrapped by a bunch of political onanists who couldn't give a **** about anything but their student politics.
Bollocks. The SNP already have a mandate for a referendum, and no mater how much people of your persuasion wish this would not happen it will happen....next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Johnson dodging Andrew Neil on BBC and it looks like he's also backing out of Channel 4's climate change leaders debate. It's odd that Johnson should suddenly have become so diffident, shyness never having been a problem before. Speaking of his desire for media attention, another article of his, this one from the 1990s, is getting attention. This one he wrote about single mothers:
“ill-raised, ignorant, aggressive and illegitimate children who in theory will be paying for our pensions”.Suggesting swingeing cuts to benefits to tackle teen pregnancy, he wrote: “It must be generally plausible that if having a baby out of wedlock meant sure-fire destitution on a Victorian scale, young girls might indeed think twice about having a baby.“And yet no government – and certainly no Labour government – will have the courage to make the cuts in the safety net of the viciousness required to provide anything like such a deterrent. For the reality, surely, is that nine times out of 10 these girls will go on having babies out of wedlock not because they want to qualify for some state hand-out, but because, in their monotonous and depressing lives, they want a little creature to love.”
I believe he now has a couple of 'illegitimate' children of his own. :cb
Bollocks to which bit, needing cover for the trial or not having an Indyref next year?Quote:
Originally Posted by Curried
It isn't a matter of what I do or don't wish for, it's a matter of what they are aiming for tactically. For one thing it is very likely that by the time of any prospective Indyref2 next year the SNP will have a new leader still bedding themselves in. They are also conscious that the trial and its consequences is likely to be a big and not positive distraction from an Indyref2 in 2020.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Our next Prime Minister really is a morally degenerate hypocritical ********. But then, so is the alternative.
Why do you think they will have anew leader? Due to the trial?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
No Labour candidate in Falkirk.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50585278
This is interesting. I am pretty sure I want independence, but will listen to the arguments for whether it is a good idea, and how it should be achieved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Curried
I can't see how this totalitarian approach to a democratic decision is helpful, and find myself wondering if I am just supposed to class myself as bring of a certain persuasion, and vote accordingly.
In fact a lot of time could be saved by simply classifying the persuasion of the entire population in advance and allocating their votes accordingly.
Let's be respectful to people's right to make up their minds and participate in debate. There is sometimes sinister about this "whether you like it, or not" approach to democracy.
In response ODS, lets break that down:
The SNP are predicted to increase their seats in Scotland by more than 20% at the GE, and I doubt the outcome of any trial on an ex-poly will hinder the cause of independence.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Speculation on your part, but we can agree to differ.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Source? Or do you have a skin in the game?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
The SNP already have a mandate for another referendum confirmed by a majority vote in the Scottish Parliament. BTW How can you presume to know what "they" want?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Thanks for the tip. … I'll take it to the bank. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Know something about what NS knew/did/didn't do or just your hunch?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Whether you actually know something about the trial or it's just wishful thinking or not ... I think you're right about the timing. Either:Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
- hung parliament, there will be EUref2 and that will have to come first
or
- Tory majority, they politically can't cave to indyref2
So, the SNP & Greens will have to go for unambiguous, unconditional mandate in 2021 Holyrood and win. Fwiw, I think they will. And I think even the Tories will have to back down on that basis. Spain/Catalonia type situation is something the Yes side can't afford, but do the No side *really* want to go there either?