monkey wrote:Since the first leaks from Whatsapp groups, where Tories suddenly discovered what screenshots were, the only stuff I've seen are performative rants that the senders are quite keen to have out there.
stonechalice wrote:Who thinks he's actually gonna go?
davyK wrote:I have no doubt that this particular PM and cabinet will be the laughing stock of history.
monkey wrote:monkey wrote:Since the first leaks from Whatsapp groups, where Tories suddenly discovered what screenshots were, the only stuff I've seen are performative rants that the senders are quite keen to have out there.
afgavinstan wrote:And if all else fails, hit out with a "instead of playing politics, we're more concerned with Levelling Up" line as if they're not fucking politicians that indeed, um, play that every fucking day.
Boils my blood that shite.
Wookienopants wrote:If rather see both set on fire
Even by the standards of No 10 briefings, that was a pretty amazing one. Among questions his spokesman/press secretary refused to answer were (mini-thread):
• When PM knew about event
• When he realised he shouldn't have been there
• If he saw drink/food
• Who else was there
• If Carrie was there
• If the PM brought a bottle.
• How he "thanked staff", eg a speech?
• If the press secretary was there herself
• On what basis PM believes the event might not have breached Covid rules
• Whether PM still believes he adhered to Covid rules more widely
[deep breath]
• Whether the PM lied about parties.
ª Whether he will accept any recommendations from Sue Gray
• When her report might come
• Who decides on sanctions for non-civil service staff
• If PM has been interviewed by Gray.
• If Carrie J has/will be interviewed.
• How soon after completion the Gray report will be published.
• If the PM might have to resign following the Gray report.
And last but not least:
• Why answering basic, factual questions amounts to "pre-empting" the report, which was the reason given throughout.
DrewMerson wrote:Regarding the Prince Andrew thing, as far as I can see this ruling doesn’t necessarily mean that he will definitely see the inside of a courtroom. This ruling just ends his legal team’s attempt to have the case dismissed, they may yet seek to settle this before it goes to trial.
DrewMerson wrote:That’s what I said, isn’t it?
Yossarian wrote:In that case, why is it a ‘ploy’? What sense is there in people putting others who may well support left wing candidates into boxes, being hostile towards them, making them feel unwelcome? Why shouldn’t that be called out as being counterproductive when it pretty clearly is?
Funkstain wrote:At worst, these policies despite seeming generous are so market-driven and capitalistic* that they undermine the concepts of fairness and equality fundamentally, and lead to a disenfranchised base who look elsewhere and internally for better solutions, and that's how we end up with Brexit and demagoguery and populism and unchecked executive power and ludicrous culture wars.
LivDiv wrote:The most likely route to PR in my mind is one where Labour are forming a coalition post-election and to do so they adopt PR under pressure both from the other coalition parties and internally. For that to happen the Tories can't be able to form a government of any form. So constituencies need to have fewer parties splitting the non-Tory vote.
JonB wrote:I'd prefer PR but I don't see it as the great hope that some of the current centrist gang seem to. It's another move in the game, a tactic to find a new advantage, not a solution to the problems in Britain's democracy, nor even a means to reach them. And currently it seems as much of a fantasy as a strong new left-wing party emerging anyway.
LivDiv wrote:He must think he has the Trump style cult support of the public. He doesn't.
Dark Soldier wrote:He isn't gonna go lads. 'Mon now.
EvilRedEye wrote:It genuinely baffles me that they don't seem to care that every kid in the country is gonna be told what a bunch of cunts they all were when they learn about the pandemic in history class in 50+ years' time. Imagine going down in history as just a giant, giant cunt.
LivDiv wrote:I hope Giuffre refuses a settlement. Reports her team requested one before but now it has gone this far maybe she will want her day in court.
Yeah, I get how it works, that's why I said I'd prefer it. Democracy's problems run a little deeper.Yossarian wrote:It definitely solves some problems in British democracy, in particular: 1. Parties winning absolute power despite not receiving a plurality of the vote. 2. The fact that some votes are more important than others based on where you live, leading to certain areas being neglected by government campaigning. 3. The fact that many of us feel we need to vote for a party that we don’t have any great affinity for due to the fact that the reality of voting under FPTP is that you’re presented with a binary choice, with a third option of throwing your vote away.I'd prefer PR but I don't see it as the great hope that some of the current centrist gang seem to. It's another move in the game, a tactic to find a new advantage, not a solution to the problems in Britain's democracy, nor even a means to reach them. And currently it seems as much of a fantasy as a strong new left-wing party emerging anyway.
Exactly. It all seems like a vague tactical hope at the moment. Labour aren't going to lead the charge, and with the misplaced self-belief of the current leadership, even if they get in with a coalition they'll believe they can win outright next time. If there's a referendum, it'll be another half-arsed one.Armitage_Shankburn wrote:The problem with PR is only a left wing party can bring it about in the first place. The precedent is for a referendum which is going to be hard to win. And the other precedent is that left wing party, having finally won power, in a winner takes all system, will be seduced by that power and not want to give it up.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!