Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

The best thing about our system is that every single person in the country gets an equal vote under equal circumstances. Unless a National ID card scheme is introduced this will just alienate poorer voters. Just another way to rig the system.

Pr4wn wrote:Good to see you playing the man and not the ball as usual.

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

I value his opinion as little as you value mine I shall assume. He's a writer for remainers so hardly a surprise.

I am always interested in reading what you write. Just because I disagree with most of it doesn't mean it does not have value.

I don't think its a good look to dismiss Dunt just because you can apply a convenient label. If you are going to filter journos based on labels there are a few labels which are probably of more fundamental importance.

The label is always important and does play a significant part. I don't need to bother reading the content to dismiss his opinion, much the same way we can dismiss Trump, Farage, Robinson etc. They might on occasion say something that isn't mindless racist drivel but that drivel will always supersede all else.

Sobering week for the Govt...Covid case rises...Patel resignation calls..Ping shambles...

Con 38 -6
Lab 34 +3

Shambolic Govt..Shambolic week.. but hard to see Labour winning an Election when the switch to Sunak gets made....He is still the most popular politician by some way...As for the Chancellor/Shadow approvals

Sunak....38%
Reeves...8%

@Trussman, the problem for Reeves (and much of the Shadow Cabinet) is lack of visibility, though she appears bit less anonymous than her predecessor Dodds.

If Sunak wants to make a move to cash in on his (current) popularity whilst his brand is still relatively untarnished and become PM its better to do it sooner rather than later. When you're showering money around (in a very un-Conservative way) on furlough and big government support, its relatively easy to be popular as chancellor. Once you start making the cuts and tax rises to pay for the Covid bill and the impact of Brexit starts to kick in the popularity will wear off, so I think he has 1 year max before the shine comes off.

Keep an eye on Jeremy Hunt too - as chair of select committee on Health he's been positioning himself as the only sensible Tory left.

MrInvisible wrote:@Trussman, the problem for Reeves (and much of the Shadow Cabinet) is lack of visibility, though she appears bit less anonymous than her predecessor Dodds.

If Sunak wants to make a move to cash in on his (current) popularity whilst his brand is still relatively untarnished and become PM its better to do it sooner rather than later.  When you're showering money around (in a very un-Conservative way) on furlough and big government support, its relatively easy to be popular as chancellor.  Once you start making the cuts and tax rises to pay for the Covid bill and the impact of Brexit starts to kick in the popularity will wear off, so I think he has 1 year max before the shine comes off.

Keep an eye on Jeremy Hunt too - as chair of select committee on Health he's been positioning himself as the only sensible Tory left.

He knows where all the health department skeletons are buried (mainly because he put them there)

Soul Requiem wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

I value his opinion as little as you value mine I shall assume. He's a writer for remainers so hardly a surprise.

I am always interested in reading what you write. Just because I disagree with most of it doesn't mean it does not have value.

I don't think its a good look to dismiss Dunt just because you can apply a convenient label. If you are going to filter journos based on labels there are a few labels which are probably of more fundamental importance.

The label is always important and does play a significant part. I don't need to bother reading the content to dismiss his opinion, much the same way we can dismiss Trump, Farage, Robinson etc. They might on occasion say something that isn't mindless racist drivel but that drivel will always supersede all else.

The thing is Dunt is more centrist/ left of centre. If you think he's too left wing that puts you where exactly?

Where did I refer to Dunt as being too left wing?

MrInvisible wrote:If Sunak wants to make a move to cash in on his (current) popularity whilst his brand is still relatively untarnished and become PM its better to do it sooner rather than later.  When you're showering money around (in a very un-Conservative way) on furlough and big government support, its relatively easy to be popular as chancellor.  Once you start making the cuts and tax rises to pay for the Covid bill and the impact of Brexit starts to kick in the popularity will wear off, so I think he has 1 year max before the shine comes off.

Agree with this.

I see Alok Sharma is the latest hypocrite on the front bench:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58112621

How can jet-setting like this possibly be defensible when you're the president of COP26? It's literally 'do as I say, not as I do'.

Johnson once again refusing to isolate, but this time after touring across Scotland with one of his members of staff positive. Surely he should be isolating until he gets a negative test?

One rule for them once a-bloody-gain.

Snp gain from Labour yesterday..

SNP won on second preferences.. Lab went from 1st to 3rd...

First round..

SNP 42% +1.2
Con 24% +2.4
Lab 21% -9.%

I'll be staggered if the useless Knight wins a GE....Especially as Sunak is the most popular MP by a mile and the Tories will switch before the GE..

Labour need to ditch the Clown.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Snp gain from Labour yesterday..

SNP won on second preferences.. Lab went from 1st to 3rd...

First round..

SNP 42% +1.2
Con 24% +2.4
Lab 21% -9.%

I'll be staggered if the useless Knight wins a GE....Especially as Sunak is the most popular MP by a mile and the Tories will switch before the GE..

Labour need to ditch the Clown.

They ditched Corbyn quite a while ago...

Yougov poll...

Who do you think has done a better job of leading Labour..

Corbyn 46%
About equal 38%
Starmer 13%....

Do you think Starmer will be PM ??

Yes 13%
No 78%..

Covid...Afghanistan...Economy...Govt corruption so much to aim at.... The Libs...Greens and Tories won seats last night...Nothing for Labour...again.

Unable to find those polls, Truss.

The most recent Corbyn v Starmer (in terms of leading Labour) YouGov poll I could find was a few months back when 62% said Corbyn would be a worse Labour leader than Starmer, with 15% claiming Corbyn would be better.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/ytdo43842n/Internal_Labour_Keir_210512.pdf

Will Starmer be PM is 63-15 in favour of 'no'.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/will-keir-starmer-ever-become-prime-minister

We probably agree that Starmer's leadership is poor, but we differ in the solution to that. At the moment Labour are drifting towards a fifth consecutive defeat (8 straight months since a polling lead) and it's only FPTP giving them oxygen. PR would end the Labour Party but, amusingly enough, most Labour members support PR.

I see 'Young Labour' are banned from Labour conference...If only Labour were as aggressive with Boris and the Cons..

Yougov..

Is Keir starmer doing well as leader of the Labour Party ??

Yes 20%
No..59%

Useless..

Dominic Raab making a complete spectacle of himself answering questions re: Afghanistan. The man hasnt answered a single question. Its an embarassment to the office he holds, and its a damning inditement of our current state he hasnt been sacked yet.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I see 'Young Labour' are banned from Labour conference...If only Labour were as aggressive with Boris and the Cons..

Yougov..

Is Keir starmer doing well as leader of the Labour Party ??

Yes 20%
No..59%

Useless..

You realise that your argument applies to both sides of the Labour divide. The far left of the party have done their level best to undermine Starmer from the outset of his tenure.

There is no far left at Westminster..

Corbyn's manifesto was for more Public spending on chronically underfunded treasures like the NHS. ....£10 minimum wage...Coupled with a reasonable green agenda based around a Tax system which made Amazon and their ilk pay their fair share and a slight raise in Tax for everyone earning over 80k but with the Tax rise starting on the first Penny over 80k.

If that is far left then Heaven help us.

My problem is I actually research these things before I vote...Doubt it will catch on anytime soon.

Right now we have plenty of evidence of what you get if you elect a narcissistic buffoon who surrounds himself with yes men. It is of course a tragedy that Johnson got into no.10 but Corbyn exudes no competency whatsoever.

The policies don't matter if you never believe that they'll be delivered.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:There is no far left at Westminster..

Corbyn's manifesto was for more Public spending on chronically underfunded treasures like the NHS. ....£10 minimum wage...Coupled with a reasonable green agenda based around a Tax system which made Amazon and their ilk pay their fair share and a slight raise in Tax for everyone earning over 80k but with the Tax rise starting on the first Penny over 80k.

If that is far left then Heaven help us.

My problem is I actually research these things before I vote...Doubt it will catch on anytime soon.

....Or you could just not address the point being made and instead prevaricate. Whether you define Corbyn and his followers as far left (and by UK standards they most certainly are), they have done their very best to undermine his leadership. That is the point being made.

Starmer being garbage might not be a problem.. This prospective NI rise is suicide in middle income Brexit areas the Tories took from Labour in 2019...

Needs 50 Tories to defeat it if it isn't scrapped...Be surprised if 50 can't be found..

Johnson is Starmer's best asset and vice versa.

Starmer does need to capitalise on this latest government disaster. I don't understand why he's not shouting about a top rate tax increase from the rooftops.

It's been very well documented that the rich have become richer and the poor poorer over the course of the Tories' being in power. This has, as we all know, been exacerbated by he pandemic and Brexit, which has turned out to be a complete disaster as predicted.

Top rate needs to be put back to 50p and there needs to be an increase in cap gains. Increasing NI contributions is about as regressive as it gets and, as usual, the poor will end up picking up far more proportionally than the rich.

Starmer needs to press home the message that Johnson and the Tories do not care about the poor. They never have and they never will. He can be progressive without coming across as being radical like Corbyn did. But now is the time to be more active. No more fence sitting.

It's not so much the genuinely poor that will be affected, as anyone from minimum wage up to the 'squeezed middle' on the cusp of higher rate tax.

Absolutely agree that this is the wrong bracket to be raising taxes on, both morally and politically - a rise of a couple of percent on the higher rate of tax, or perhaps sliding the starting level down a bit would have been much fairer. Boris and co have left an open goal for Starmer, but he really needs to smash the ball into it.

Pr4wn wrote:Starmer does need to capitalise on this latest government disaster. I don't understand why he's not shouting about a top rate tax increase from the rooftops.

It's been very well documented that the rich have become richer and the poor poorer over the course of the Tories' being in power. This has, as we all know, been exacerbated by he pandemic and Brexit, which has turned out to be a complete disaster as predicted.

Top rate needs to be put back to 50p and there needs to be an increase in cap gains. Increasing NI contributions is about as regressive as it gets and, as usual, the poor will end up picking up far more proportionally than the rich.

Starmer needs to press home the message that Johnson and the Tories do not care about the poor. They never have and they never will. He can be progressive without coming across as being radical like Corbyn did. But now is the time to be more active. No more fence sitting.

Come on now, Brexit hasnt been a total disaster yet. Probably because the government who negotiated the deal and got elected on the back on the deal keep postponing actually implementing the deal.

I dont know but if I voted for this shower of Poopie I'd be very red in the face, either from embarrassment or anger.

Also worth noting that the 1.25% rise in NI is, in fact, a 2.5% rise. Employers obviously have to also foot 1.25%. So this is effectively a work tax.

Those who won't have to contribute as part of this move by the government? Those with unearned income from properties, trust funds, overseas etc and those who are retired.

This is a tax on working people and their employers and it completely disproportionately hits the working poor.

Anyway, aren't we supposed to have an extra £350m per week to invest in the NHS or something?

Pr4wn wrote:Also worth noting that the 1.25% rise in NI is, in fact, a 2.5% rise. Employers obviously have to also foot 1.25%. So this is effectively a work tax.

Those who won't have to contribute as part of this move by the government? Those with unearned income from properties, trust funds, overseas etc and those who are retired.

This is a tax on working people and their employers and it completely disproportionately hits the working poor.

Anyway, aren't we supposed to have an extra £350m per week to invest in the NHS or something?

The benefits of Brexit, along with the not blue blue passport /s

Passports. I still have my first passport somewhere. It was black.

Opinium..Scotland.

SNP 51% +4
Con.21%..-4
Lab..17% -3

Great for Sturgeon...Dire for everybody else..

Independence...

Yes 51%
No..49%

Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

Scotland is massively divided because of Independence, and the Tories have taken up the defacto Pro-Union spot. (Theres also a massive sectarian aspect to it aswell).

Labour are a spent force in Scotland until Scotland get Independence.

Samo wrote:Scotland is massively divided because of Independence, and the Tories have taken up the defacto Pro-Union spot. (Theres also a massive sectarian aspect to it aswell).

Labour are a spent force in Scotland until Scotland get Independence.

Which is a shame because Sarwar has come across really well and has put forward some good ideas.

Problem is that politics in Scotland (and almost everywhere else these days) is dominated by one idea - nationalism.

I dont mind Sarwar, but he’s caught between a rock and a hard place. Certainly the most likeable Scottish Labour leader in a long time.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

It is crystal clear what they can do to change that. Change their stance on independence. Even softening it a little may win a handful of seats from the Scottish Tories. But they stubbornly refuse to listen to their constituents on the issue of independence. Two general elections ago Ken Livingstone called for Labour in Scotland to cut ties with the Westminster branch. How right he was.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

It is crystal clear what they can do to change that. Change their stance on independence. Even softening it a little may win a handful of seats from the Scottish Tories. But they stubbornly refuse to listen to their constituents on the issue of independence. Two general elections ago Ken Livingstone called for Labour in Scotland to cut ties with the Westminster branch. How right he was.

Are you advocating that Sarwar lends support for something that he doesn't agree with just so that he wins more votes?  He's repeatedly said that he wants a better and fairer Scotland as part of the UK and the party membership voted him in as leader on that basis.  He's trying to get voter's to agree with him in just the same way that the SNP are trying to get more people to agree with them that independence is the best option.  

Both the SNP are the Conservatives are exploiting the position in Scotland to keep constitutional issues front and centre in the argument because (a) it suits the SNP to deflect from their poor record in government, and (b) it suits the Conservatives to deflect from the ever worsening sh1tshow that is their own performance in Westminster.  

Given that nationalism (whether it be Scottish nationalism or British nationalism) dominates all aspects of Scottish politics, all that would be achieved by Scottish Labour supporting independence is a split in the pro-independence vote and greater support for the Conservatives.  It wouldn't create greater support for independence.

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

It is crystal clear what they can do to change that. Change their stance on independence. Even softening it a little may win a handful of seats from the Scottish Tories. But they stubbornly refuse to listen to their constituents on the issue of independence. Two general elections ago Ken Livingstone called for Labour in Scotland to cut ties with the Westminster branch. How right he was.

Are you advocating that Sarwar lends support for something that he doesn't agree with just so that he wins more votes?  He's repeatedly said that he wants a better and fairer Scotland as part of the UK and the party membership voted him in as leader on that basis.  He's trying to get voter's to agree with him in just the same way that the SNP are trying to get more people to agree with them that independence is the best option.  

Both the SNP are the Conservatives are exploiting the position in Scotland to keep constitutional issues front and centre in the argument because (a) it suits the SNP to deflect from their poor record in government, and (b) it suits the Conservatives to deflect from the ever worsening sh1tshow that is their own performance in Westminster.  

Given that nationalism (whether it be Scottish nationalism or British nationalism) dominates all aspects of Scottish politics, all that would be achieved by Scottish Labour supporting independence is a split in the pro-independence vote and greater support for the Conservatives.  It wouldn't create greater support for independence.

Since when has a party been all about what the leader wants?

The question is where have the Labour voters gone in Scotland? The answer? To become SNP voters because they are pushing for independence. The rise of the SNP in elections has corresponded with the fall of Labour's empire in Scotland. What Sarwar believes in is evidently not what Scots believe in so Labour in Scotland will continue to rot for that reason. If Sarwar cannot even force himself to soften his stance and say he'd support a referendum in say even two years it may have won back a few long long Labour supporters or more.

Labour is a unionist political party so backing a referendum on independence is a non starter.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

It is crystal clear what they can do to change that. Change their stance on independence. Even softening it a little may win a handful of seats from the Scottish Tories. But they stubbornly refuse to listen to their constituents on the issue of independence. Two general elections ago Ken Livingstone called for Labour in Scotland to cut ties with the Westminster branch. How right he was.

Are you advocating that Sarwar lends support for something that he doesn't agree with just so that he wins more votes?  He's repeatedly said that he wants a better and fairer Scotland as part of the UK and the party membership voted him in as leader on that basis.  He's trying to get voter's to agree with him in just the same way that the SNP are trying to get more people to agree with them that independence is the best option.  

Both the SNP are the Conservatives are exploiting the position in Scotland to keep constitutional issues front and centre in the argument because (a) it suits the SNP to deflect from their poor record in government, and (b) it suits the Conservatives to deflect from the ever worsening sh1tshow that is their own performance in Westminster.  

Given that nationalism (whether it be Scottish nationalism or British nationalism) dominates all aspects of Scottish politics, all that would be achieved by Scottish Labour supporting independence is a split in the pro-independence vote and greater support for the Conservatives.  It wouldn't create greater support for independence.

Since when has a party been all about what the leader wants?

The question is where have the Labour voters gone in Scotland? The answer? To become SNP voters because they are pushing for independence. The rise of the SNP in elections has corresponded with the fall of Labour's empire in Scotland. What Sarwar believes in is evidently not what Scots believe in so Labour in Scotland will continue to rot for that reason. If Sarwar cannot even force himself to soften his stance and say he'd support a referendum in say even two years it may have won back a few long long Labour supporters or more.

He was elected by the members and a majority of the members (just like the majority of the Scottish people) don't back independence. Also a strange response given that Sturgeon is running the SNP like her own personal fiefdom.

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Labour won a 66 seat majority in 2005 by winning 41 seats in Scotland...If these figures were back then...Blair would obviously have lost his majority..

Hard to see what Labour can do to change it.. Corbyn won 7 seats in 2017...Labour is on 1 seat with these figures.

NI insurance rise poll...

Agree..... 33
Disagree 45
Don't know 22

Unfortunately it's these dangerous 22% that don't understand anything that determine Elections.

It is crystal clear what they can do to change that. Change their stance on independence. Even softening it a little may win a handful of seats from the Scottish Tories. But they stubbornly refuse to listen to their constituents on the issue of independence. Two general elections ago Ken Livingstone called for Labour in Scotland to cut ties with the Westminster branch. How right he was.

Are you advocating that Sarwar lends support for something that he doesn't agree with just so that he wins more votes?  He's repeatedly said that he wants a better and fairer Scotland as part of the UK and the party membership voted him in as leader on that basis.  He's trying to get voter's to agree with him in just the same way that the SNP are trying to get more people to agree with them that independence is the best option.  

Both the SNP are the Conservatives are exploiting the position in Scotland to keep constitutional issues front and centre in the argument because (a) it suits the SNP to deflect from their poor record in government, and (b) it suits the Conservatives to deflect from the ever worsening sh1tshow that is their own performance in Westminster.  

Given that nationalism (whether it be Scottish nationalism or British nationalism) dominates all aspects of Scottish politics, all that would be achieved by Scottish Labour supporting independence is a split in the pro-independence vote and greater support for the Conservatives.  It wouldn't create greater support for independence.

Since when has a party been all about what the leader wants?

The question is where have the Labour voters gone in Scotland? The answer? To become SNP voters because they are pushing for independence. The rise of the SNP in elections has corresponded with the fall of Labour's empire in Scotland. What Sarwar believes in is evidently not what Scots believe in so Labour in Scotland will continue to rot for that reason. If Sarwar cannot even force himself to soften his stance and say he'd support a referendum in say even two years it may have won back a few long long Labour supporters or more.

He was elected by the members and a majority of the members (just like the majority of the Scottish people) don't back independence.  Also a strange response given that Sturgeon is running the SNP like her own personal fiefdom.  

Please explain to me why Labour's vote share has plummeted in Scotland and why the SNP's has boomed? Answer is stances of both parties on independence. Labour categorically reject an independence referendum which is not going to win back voters who left them for that very reason. The Tory vote in Scotland has remained a constant as largely (though not entirely) their votes come for staunch unionists. That is not the case for Scottish Labour voters. As for Sturgeon and the SNP it seems your view is not held by general Scottish public given she is far more popular than any of the other party leaders and way above BJ in popularity polls.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Please explain to me why Labour's vote share has plummeted in Scotland and why the SNP's has boomed? Answer is stances of both parties on independence. Labour categorically reject an independence referendum which is not going to win back voters who left them for that very reason. The Tory vote in Scotland has remained a constant as largely (though not entirely) their votes come for staunch unionists. That is not the case for Scottish Labour voters. As for Sturgeon and the SNP it seems your view is not held by general Scottish public given she is far more popular than any of the other party leaders and way above BJ in popularity polls.

Is anyone denying that the shift from Labour to the SNP is independence driven? No, if Labour shifted their opinion they'd run the risk of their vote collapsing even more, the unionists would potentially jump ship and there would be no guarantee they'd get back their former voters from the SNP. What are Sturgeon's latest approval ratings?

Soul Requiem wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Please explain to me why Labour's vote share has plummeted in Scotland and why the SNP's has boomed? Answer is stances of both parties on independence. Labour categorically reject an independence referendum which is not going to win back voters who left them for that very reason. The Tory vote in Scotland has remained a constant as largely (though not entirely) their votes come for staunch unionists. That is not the case for Scottish Labour voters. As for Sturgeon and the SNP it seems your view is not held by general Scottish public given she is far more popular than any of the other party leaders and way above BJ in popularity polls.

Is anyone denying that the shift from Labour to the SNP is independence driven? No, if Labour shifted their opinion they'd run the risk of their vote collapsing even more, the unionists would potentially jump ship and there would be no guarantee they'd get back their former voters from the SNP. What are Sturgeon's latest approval ratings?

It is almost impossible for Labour's vote share in Scotland to diminish anymore than it has. They are down to one solitary seat in Scotland in the General Election. Only a limbo dancer can go lower than that. You are correct though that there is no absolute guarantee that Labour's lost voters to the SNP would come swarming back but it would certainly see some votes pick up. We can only go on election results and the last election was Scottish Elections in May where the SNP increased seat counts by one so it is certainly not in any jeopardy. And just in the last few days an opinion poll had SNP up four points which suggests no discernible dip in popularity. It may take a blow with the introduction of vaccine passports but will have to see. I am skeptical about it but COVID-19 cases are on the rise again so perhaps her acting on it may prove smart in the long run but I have my doubts.

On Sarwar he is certainly a better leader than they have had in recent years but I just do not see where he will attract votes from in the coming months and years.

It seems you agree with SR but you don't realise it but you're too desperate for an argument.

Pr4wn wrote:It seems you agree with SR but you don't realise it but you're too desperate for an argument.

Oh sorry for that. I thought I was putting across a different opinion. Seems like that is not welcome here.

Latest Scottish poll... SNP win all 59 seats...

Whilst in France the far right are getting close..

Harris poll..

Macron 54
LePen.. 46

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:It seems you agree with SR but you don't realise it but you're too desperate for an argument.

Oh sorry for that. I thought I was putting across a different opinion. Seems like that is not welcome here.

What are you talking about?

Andrew Neil confirming on Twitter he’s quitting his role at GBNews, presumably because they announced it on the show through the week but no one was watching.

There was a hilarious column by Stewart Lee in the Observer Sunday before last about Neil.

Angry with the BBC’s imaginary woke bias and feeling undervalued in his small hours niche, the Steel Wool Sinéad O’Connor flounced off to be the figurehead of the avowedly anti-woke new channel GB News. Neil’s theatrical exit has turned out to be the equivalent of a man storming indignantly out of a dinner party through a door into a broom cupboard.

Its also very funny to watch Nigel Farages slot lose half its viewers in two weeks - not surprising seeing as he hasnt had a new thought it about 20 years.

But he’ll be fine, GBeeBees isnt the first plane crash he’s been involved in.

Gavin Williamson sacked as Education Secretary. More reshuffling to be announced but dont let this distract you from the government voting to cut UC and increase NI, leaving hundreds of thousands worse off as a result.

On the subject of voting, allegations of some appalling behaviour from government whips, effectively threatening to withhold investment in Tory MPs' constituencies if they rebel. Never mind that this is public money.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/15/tory-whips-accused-threatening-rebels-loss-local-funding

Robert Buckland and Robert Jendrick sacked as Justice and Housing secretaries respectively.

That's only good news about Jenrick if he doesn't end up promoted.