ICT skills input
Ctrl+s. Save files
Ctrl+ V to paste
Ctrl + C to copy
Ctrl + X to Cut..
Ctrl + E to centre align the text
Ctrl R to right align the text
Ctrl + L to left aligh the text
To justify a paragraph Ctrl + J
the function key (F1) will access word help!..
Tuesday 26th November 2019
Proclamation News and Gatherence
Let’s play a game.
Let’s scripture all the Prime Ministers of your party from history to date of today:
Without cheating. ..
From the top of your head
William Ewart Gladstone 1886
President Roosevelt was Us 1933 start of world war
Whinstone Churchill 1945
Frank Mackmillian 1957
Margaret Thatcher 1983
John major 1997
David Cameron 2005 .
Theresa May. Ended 2018
Boris Johnson 2019
@conservatives
That’s all my knowledge.
Withing history an current without cheating.
Missed alot out I’m quit assuming. But not bad for Loyalty.
They say boxers are punch drunk. Well bloody good job I don’t drink eh?
No Provocation in that department that’s a certainty.
Full of Optimism.
@ukparliament
Not sure on Oliver Cromwell which you’ll see a statue outside the front gate of parliament.
But I certainly know my history.
I sit an wonder sometimes all these so called educated MPs with or without paper work, made it.
It’s horrendous, even more so without no real life skills or hard manual labour.
I mean square root an quantity surveying, working in freeze fore weathering conditions, without no blood circulation, Going to there meta tarsals, Tarsals, meta carpels, Carple’s an philanages.
✋
You wanted Professorship.
Latin above sports science
An Tellogical
Men’s Rea
Actus Reus
Greek terminology.
Tabloid casting
An both Broadsheet castings.
Art work
What more does a Professor have to proof?
Not much else.
Optimism is heridiatary being in the Johnson Business sector.
Is it not?
@borisjohnsonuk
Proc on the microphone it’s my Proximity.
I’ve been trying some new things out there,
yeah reaching out,
clinching on straws,
turning my minimum to maximum.
Sometimes we reach out an preyrer,
I sit an wonder
sometimes what’s my
Lifes blueprint,
Within its prophecy,
With what it was
an what is destined to be.) X2
(It’s future Prosperity matters,
of which god’s has us destined to be.
I can’t guarantee,
Of what I’m destined to be be.
But all I know is I wanna leave a legacy,
like a transquilty,
without a formularity.)2
I’m like god’s plan,
Transparent ya see.
Giving a guidance within it’s vicinity,
whorship an praise follow me.
(Alcohol an Narcotics is sin all over the globe,
almost criminalisation,
now we looking for his forgiveness,
because you been acting in sinfulness.
But know you beg to differ,
🎤if I” shouldve I” gone contrary to putrissity.🎤
Gotta keep a vision to stay within Gods division.x2
🏰I’m like god’s plan,🏰
transparent ya see.
Giving a guidance within its vicinity ,
whorship an praise follow me.
🙏🙏🙏🕍Preyrer Time,🏰🙏🙏🙏
I wanna turn my minnium to maximum
I wanna do more good then I did yesterday
Now say it,
Say,
I wanna do more for God tomorrow,
then I did today
Don’t go back on this word.
Don’t go contray to God’s word.
This is my plan, our plan.
For success,
👀👀👀We have a vision,👀👀👀
To be encouraged
👄👄👄I want us all to acknowledge🤙 with abundance,👄👄👄
to its futures Prosperous as Prosperity matters.
I am your Pastor,
I am your guidance that helps you reach its upmost maximum.
Now say Amen.👼
Hallelujah.
🕍Together we are God’s plan..🏰🕍🙏
Saturday 23rd November
Proclamation News an Gatherence
We started this year with PNG 2019
LAST year we was called PNN
Paternalistic national news.
I mean how can one man come up with all this Optimism? Headlines for journalists idea creations.
Philosophy epic episode.
It eeks out the differentials within humanity.
#optimism -Flair-Charisma-Characteristics-Pride an Passion.
Creative Minds.
We look at both tabloid an Broadsheet expertise scripture, sometimes I begun to discover. Of which is more benificail?
Because quit frankly no matter which you decide to go with?
Tabloid daily mirror perhaps
Or Broadsheet newspaper article such as
Daily Telegraph for instance.
Not all fictional facts but propoganda.
A realistic Journalist hardly exists into today modern world.
Such as you seen me inside @ukparliament
Writing a full dialogue, of the lineup off todays infrastructure an our welfare at state.
I have a mind full of Optimism, a brain absorption like a sponge.
If only I could afford to attend every day.
I am already margins ahead of Jeremy Corbyn, what an ashambles.
MP for Labour party.
Was a MP of North London in 1983.
When our famous Red Fox Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister.
Haha do you reckon that’s why Corbyn wants to ban fox Hunting. Strangely but also very peculiar he may of wept miss Thatcher.
In this case we’ll let the fox hunting slide.
@conservatives
Professor Johnson, so stay tuned.
If it’s Bonified Conservatism your after then look no further a field.
Stay encouraged. Ki
An give me some acknowledgement.
This is so very peculiar, I mean when talking in this man’s concept words cannot describe, his hidden agenda.
(Jeremy Corbyn).
Labour’s leader draws fire because he doesn’t go along with the double standards ruling the UK’s relations with foreign powers
Last week Jeremy Corbyn was branded a “terrorist sympathiser” by a heckler in Glasgow, who demanded to know where his “Islamic jihad scarf” could be found.
The moment, gleefully covered by the rightwing press, lost some of its lustre when it emerged that the heckler, a Church of Scotland minister called Richard Cameron, allegedly had a back catalogue of Islamophobic and homophobic tweets. But the reverend’s terrorist sympathiser insult did not come out of nowhere. David Cameron, then serving as prime minister, denounced Corbyn and his colleagues in precisely the same terms when he opposed airstrikes in Syria in December 2015. And Boris Johnson accused Jeremy Corbyn of seeking to “legitimate the actions of terrorists” in his speech after the 2017 Manchester bombing.
Johnson seemed confident that public opinion would share his view of Corbyn’s speech as “absolutely monstrous”. But polls suggested that the majority of people agreed with the Labour leader that terrorist attacks on British soil were connected, at least in part, to the country’s foreign policy. The “terrorist sympathiser” label appears to be as subjective as the word “terrorist” itself.
Much of the criticism directed at Corbyn focuses on his relationship with Sinn Féin in the 1980s and 90s. During the 2017 general election campaign, Boris Johnson tweeted a photo of Corbyn with Martin McGuinness in 1995, deriding his claim to have never met the IRA: “You cannot trust this man!” By the time that photo was taken, the Sinn Féin leader, Gerry Adams, had already shaken hands with the then US president, Bill Clinton; two years later, McGuinness would be a guest in Downing Street. It has been widely reported that Adams and McGuinness were still members of the IRA’s army council at the time. But Clinton, Tony Blair and the Unionist leader David Trimble all held talks with them in their capacity as Sinn Féin politicians – a distinction vital for the entire peace process.
While successive prime ministers insisted publicly that they would never “talk with terrorists”, there was in fact discreet contact between British government officials and the IRA throughout the conflict. William Whitelaw, the secretary of state for Northern Ireland at the time, even negotiated directly with the IRA leadership during the truce of 1972. Pragmatic considerations trumped any sense of moral outrage.
Corbyn’s critics insist that his record of engagement with Irish republicans is very different, because he supported their political goals. It’s quite true that leading voices of the British Labour left argued for Irish unity in the 1980s, much to the displeasure of unionists in Britain and Northern Ireland alike. Corbyn himself wasn’t a prominent figure at the time, and became an MP only in 1983; Ken Livingstone, then head of the Greater London Council, was much better known, and his comments on the Northern Irish conflict attracted a great deal of controversy. If support for a united Ireland made Corbyn and Livingstone into fellow travellers of the IRA, by the same logic, those who defended the union with Britain shared a political objective with the loyalist paramilitaries responsible for hundreds of deaths during the Troubles. The argument of guilt by association can easily backfire on those who deploy it.
The Labour leader has also faced sharp criticism for his meeting with representatives of Hamas in 2009. But even Mike Gapes, the former Labour MP who is one of Corbyn’s fiercest critics, had called for talks with the “moderate” elements of Hamas in 2007, and Tony Blair later described the boycott of Hamas after it won the 2006 Palestinian elections as a mistake. Blair himself met in private the Hamas leaders Khaled Meshaal and Ismail Haniyeh only four years ago.
And while Corbyn expressed “regret” for using the term “friends” in reference to delegates from Hamas – after it elicited an indignant response from critics – there was no such outrage when Conservative and Labour politicians referred to the Saudi royal family as valued “friends”, allies and partners of the UK in the course of a parliamentary debate on continued arms sales for the Yemen war, which those MPs supported. It is certainly difficult to imagine a consistent set of principles for a prospective British prime minister that would put Hamas beyond the pale yet allow for a close relationship with the Saudi Arabian monarchy, given the UK’s support for its war in Yemen, which has killed tens of thousands of civilians.
Of course, violence against civilians – from the Isis-inspired massacres in France to the deliberate targeting of civilians in Yemen – is a crime in all circumstances. But the way we talk about terrorism, and the application of the “terrorist” label by governments, has always been arbitrary and self-serving. In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan denounced the African National Congress in South Africa as terrorists, while supporting insurgent groups elsewhere whose record of violence against civilians was incomparably worse, from Angola to Afghanistan, Cambodia to Nicaragua. The Clinton administration initially branded the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) as a terrorist organisation, before enlisting it as an ally against Slobodan Milosevic. In recent years, the US and the UK have kept the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) on their list of proscribed terrorist groups, but accepted Syrian groups closely linked with the PKK as partners in the war against Isis. “Terrorism”, in this sense, is simply the use of violence by non-state groups without the blessing of the US State Department.
If Corbyn had been willing to internalise this value system and its peculiar set of taboos, he would have attracted much less controversy in his time as Labour leader. But the foreign policy consensus works much better when it doesn’t have to be explicitly articulated by those who support it. Insults such as “terrorist sympathiser” are meant to discourage awkward questions about the double standards that govern Britain’s relationship with the outside world.
• Daniel Finn is a journalist and historian from Ireland, and author of One Man’s Terrorist: A Political History of the IRA
Proclamation News an Gatherence
Inside an actus Reus case:-
Guilty. The intake of breath, a sob from the dead woman’s mother. A single word was all it took to bring to an end one of the most highly publicised murder cases in New Zealand’s history.
Three weeks of evidence, hundreds of hours of painstaking police work and a year of grief for a family had built up to the moment 12 jurors agreed that a 27-year-old man had murdered Grace Millane.
What had started out as a missing person inquiry in December 2018 when a daughter, sister and friend failed to respond to 22nd birthday messages swiftly turned into a murder investigation.
Within days of her disappearance, police had identified a suspect, spoken to him and, unbeknownst to the killer, tracked his movements by trawling through CCTV evidence.
Before long police would find Ms Millane’s body, which he had stuffed into a suitcase and buried in the mountainous Waitākere Ranges. There followed an outpouring of grief from a small nation unused to such crimes.
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern issued an apology to Ms Millane’s parents David and Gillian, saying “your daughter should have been safe here, she wasn’t and I’m sorry for that”.
Ms Millane, from Wickford, Essex, and the man who would go on to murder her made contact through a dating app and hit it off immediately.
She was in Auckland as part of a round-the-world trip, while he had been living there working in various sales jobs
It was clear from the footage they enjoyed each other’s company; they were close, they kissed. Ms Millane even messaged a friend back home to tell her how much she was connecting with him.
They returned to his hotel.
But after she left the lift, she was never seen alive again.
There he strangled her before taking pictures of her and watching pornography. He claimed she had died accidentally during consensual sex.
Despite his murder conviction, her killer still cannot be named. A court suppression order remains in place and is likely to do so beyond his sentencing on 21 February, in part because of the level of interest in the case.
Reporting on the trial has proved challenging; because the defendant could not be named, CCTV footage had to be blurred, and there were legal disputes over some pieces of evidence. Several witnesses also had their identities protected.
Because of the nature of the killer’s defence, Ms Millane’s parents have had to listen to claims about their daughter’s sex life, with the details reported across New Zealand and around the world.
Graphic information, in particular regarding the night of her murder, was analysed as Mr and Mrs Millane watched in court.
At times, Mrs Millane would look at the floor or hold her head in her hands as the injuries inflicted on her daughter were described.
The prosecution accused the man of “eroticising” Ms Millane’s death by taking intimate photographs of her body and looking up pornography while she lay dead in his room.
In a way, he managed to do the same during her trial with his story about consensual sex gone wrong – a tale rejected by the jury – leading to a focus on BDSM and breath-play.
Experts, Tinder dates and ex-lovers were all brought to court to talk about the killer and his victim.
Today we are back at it hammer an tongs. ..
With a brand new flux addition,
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
It’s is Proclamation News an Gatherence
With its usual Purposive. Withing UK politics.
. what, what is it.
UK’s
A hostile Sheffield audience greeted – and grilled – the Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem and SNP leaders. But how did they fare under the spotlight?
Boris Johnson He’s only been in power for 120 days, so please don’t blame him for other Conservative governments, even when he served in them. Other than that – the same, well-drilled attack lines on an end to austerity, and “delivering Brexit”.
Jeremy Corbyn A sensible pragmatist, not the social firebrand of tabloid reputation. His broad message was that Labour will stake out a middle ground on Brexit – with a key new line on him staying neutral in a second referendum – and invest heavily in vital infrastructure and public services.
Jo Swinson Anti-Brexit, anti-austerity, hostile to Johnson and Corbyn. Swinson tried her now-familiar pitch, but was regularly forced onto the defensive by an often belligerent audience. She gave ground when needed, for example on her voting record in the coalition government, and her aspirations to be prime minister.
Bit more for Proclamation News and Gatherence:!
Snp leader:,Nicola Sturgeon For the domestic audience, suitably stern on independence issues. For those elsewhere in the UK, seeking to come across as a reasonable and human voice of a modern, non-xenophobic sort of independence.
BJ None in particular – and that would be the Conservative plan. As the front-runner, the prime minister did not set out to wow the audience with zingers, merely fill out his allotted hours with an unexciting, news-repelling repetition of key Tory slogans.
Perhaps not so memorable, but in confirming Fiona Bruce’s question that he would stay neutral in a Brexit referendum, Corbyn will hope to have put to bed the Conservative attack line that he is refusing to say which side he would back in a second vote.
JS
I recognise that things have got much more challenging since Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage cooked up a deal to stitch up seats between them. I get that it is a big ask
A clever pivot from Swinson in conceding her early-election talk of becoming prime minister might have been overcooked
NS
Having heard Jeremy Corbyn, do you think he’s going to walk away from the chance to end austerity, to protect the NHS, to stop universal credit, simply because he wants, for a couple of years, to prevent Scotland to have the right to self-determination?
Sturgeon is sceptical at Corbyn’s insistence he would deny an independence vote for the first few years of a Labour government even if he was relying on the Scottish National party’s support.
BJ Keep it boring. Johnson kept to his usual, Just a Minute-style method of trying to run down the clock with long, tedious answer, trying to bore the audience into, if not acquiescence, then at least torpidity.
JC Polite to a fault, avuncular, responsible-seeming, Corbyn even at one point brandished Labour’s “grey book” of election costings. He was at pains to thank every questioner and comment-maker from the audience, even the hostile ones.
JS What strategy Swinson set out with was largely sidelined by an immediately and consistently hostile audience, into which the Question Time researchers had seemingly forgot to invite the Liberal Democrat supporters. She battled hard, and delivered her lines confidently, but it felt like an uphill task.
NS Seeking to appear as an adult in the room. Policy-wise, Sturgeon’s approach was largely dictated by the audience focus on specific aspects of independence. She sought to deal with them evenly, but as an issue – as with Brexit – most voters are likely to be beyond being persuaded from one side to another.
BJ A series of questions about claims of racism in articles he wrote as a journalist. The PM tried, as ever, to claim elements were taken out of context and mount a general defence of free speech, but got a frosty reception, particularly from an audience member who argued his treatment of burqa-wearers in print did not speak of someone who supported women.
JC Essentially, the first 10 minutes, almost without halt. A very much up-for-it Sheffield audience launched questions on his prior backing for ousted Bolivian leader Evo Morales, and antisemitism and misogyny in Labour. One questioner in particular pressed Corbyn with very detailed questions on the heckling of Jewish MP Ruth Smeeth at the launch of a report into antisemitism.
JS In truth, there were quite a few. Possibly the worst of the aggressive questioning was on the policy of revoking Brexit in the unlikely event the Lib Dems win a majority in the Commons. This is a flagship policy for the party, and seemed to win no support. Worst of all was the almost complete lack of applause for more or less any of her answers.
NS Some of the questions on the economic viability of a post-independence Scotland, and whether it would gain access to the EU given concerns such as its deficit, were slightly tricky, if perhaps sufficiently technical to prompt some neutral viewers to nip off to make a cup of tea.
BJ Numerous. Johnson’s strategy is to listen to a question, reflect on it briefly, and then launch into one of his handful of agreed strategic soundbites. As ever, much of his evidence was based on his fairly distant time as mayor of London
JC Perhaps more of a half-answered question. As noted above, Corbyn said he would be neutral in a second Brexit referendum. This does not answer the question of which side of that question he would prefer, personally.
JS Voters will have turned off their TVs none the wiser as to what, if any, arrangements Swinson might come to with other parties if the Lib Dems hold the balance of power, beyond her repeated insistence she will put neither Johnson or Corbyn into Downing Street.
NS Some of the details of how an independent Scotland would function were dealt with in a fairly vague way, but in fairness to the SNP leader, many of those details would be worked out if the process happened.
BJ His handlers will be pleased. In part, coming last of the four, Johnson seemed lucky – a feisty Sheffield crowd seemed to have run out of energy after 90 minutes of debate. There were some tricky moments, but overall he delivered no news, evaded what difficult questions there were without too much scrutiny and did not face any particularly tricky personal questions, such as the number of children he has.
JC An appearance of two halves, or more precisely, a third and a two-thirds. The start might have alarmed Labour staffers as Corbyn faced an onslaught of hostile questions on difficult subjects. But the Labour leader did not noticeably panic, and as things moved into other subjects, and friendly voices surfaced in the audience, Corbyn gained ground and ended well.
JS Ouch. When Swinson argued vehemently to be allowed onto the debates, this was not the outing she was hoping for. She battled valiantly, but – whether by accident of those picked to speak, or highlighting wider issues for the Lib Dems – Swinson faced a largely hostile response. A difficult night.
NS A confident appearance from a skilled politician – notable when during a discussion on drugs issues she listened respectfully to a recovering addict in the audience, and won applause by asking the woman if she could pass on her details so Sturgeon could discuss the subject with her later.
for Proclamation news and gatherence it has been an epic episode
Let’s take a look at wildlife. Very interesting isn’t it?
Proclamation News an Gatherence.
Snakes have four ways of moving around. Since they don’t have legs they use their muscles and their scales to do the “walking”. … Snakes will push off of any bump or other surface, rocks, trees, etc., to get going. They move in a wavy motion.
Serpentine method: This motion is what most people think of when they think of snakes. Snakes will push off of any bump or other surface, rocks, trees, etc., to get going. They move in a wavy motion. They would not be able to move over slick surfaces like glass at all. This movement is also known as lateral undulation.
Concertina method: This is a more difficult way for the snake to move but is effective in tight spaces. The snake braces the back portion of their body while pushing and extending the front portion. Then the snake drops the front portion of their body and straightens an pulls the back portion along. It is almost like they through themselves forward.
Sidewinding: This is a difficult motion to describe but it is often used by snakes to move on loose or slippery surfaces like sand or mud. The snake appears to throw its head forward and the rest of its body follows while the head is thrown forward again. (See picture.)
Rectilinear Method: This is a slow, creeping, straight movement. The snake uses some of the wide scales on its belly to grip the ground while pushing forward with the others.
isnt it very ironic to be a snake?
what a strange creature, its scaled up rough skin. very venimous some of them specifically the rattle snake an python.
any lets get onto todays Tellogical Process of Uk politics.
wheres its insisted inside Proclamation News an Gatherence
Ohh my goodness looks like we have it!!.
Jeremy Corbyn is at it again headlines the Conservation paper.
what is he upto now? of it isnt something Narcasistic or a waste of Tax payers money what is it?… lets listen in to see what it is if anything or quit frankly a random propaganda photoshoot
Radical. Transformative. Path-breaking. These cliches are often trotted out in the pages of party manifestos.
Manifestos are more than shopping lists of policy priorities and pledges. They represent an opportunity for political parties to put forward a narrative of reform and renewal of the underpinning purpose of the state. Of course, they are always couched in the rhetoric of change and innovation, but rarely do they move far beyond the technocratic exercises of tweaking existing arrangements.
Taken together, the Labour Party’s manifesto for the 2019 UK election breaks with this convention and seeks to transform the British state. It advocates no less than a new social contract between the citizen and the state.
This manifesto programme seeks to strengthen state capacity and develop the UK economy via a “national transformation fund” for critical infrastructure and low-carbon technology. The inspiration here is the developmental states of east Asia, such as Japan and South Korea. It is combined with the moral and political logic of the post-war Labour government led by Clement Attlee.
There is to be a turbo-charged council housing building scheme led by the state and major investment in health and education. Then, the part-nationalisation of broadband is an interesting mix of old and new. It sees the return of public ownership, but on the radically new terrain of internet access.
Here Labour is not only seeking to reverse some of the ravages of austerity but to fundamentally redefine what should be considered basic rights of citizenship in the 21st century. Access to the internet and digital services is being put in the same category of other essential utilities, such as water, energy, education and health – things that are too important to be left to the market.
There is scepticism about whether such a radical, transformative agenda will resonate with voters enough to win the 2019 election. But even if it doesn’t, this manifesto has a longer term purpose. It is designed to be preference-shaping rather than preference accommodating. Its goal is to reframe the political debate on the party’s own terms, rather than dilute the radicalism of its proposals to appeal to anticipated affinities or the risk aversion of middle England. Under leader Jeremy Corbyn, Labour’s objective is to shift the centre ground of British politics to the left.
Labour appears to have been emboldened to push harder on these issues by changes to electoral politics in the UK. For a whole new generation of voters, the New Labour years of the 1990s and 2000s – never mind Thatcherism – is a foreign country. As an ideological project, Thatcherism was designed to empower the market and irrevocably “roll back the frontiers of the state” through policies of privatisation, deregulation and liberalisation. The policies of Conservative governments in the 1980s and 1990s, and to a lesser extent New Labour after 1997, were premised on the assumption that state involvement in the economy leads to perverse results – of which the poor performance of nationalised industries in the 1970s was seen as indicative. Thus, the role of the state has gradually been minimised.
Younger voters know little more than the politics of austerity, as defined by public spending cuts and a shrinking state. Stark warnings about a return to the “bad old days of 1970s” when you had to “wait six months for the Post Office to put in a phone line” are hardly likely to mean much to a millennial employed in the gig economy whose working pattern is determined by an algorithm via an app on their mobile phone.
While a glaring registration gap between older and younger voters remains, a surge in the number of people under 25 registering to vote in recent weeks suggests a growing political engagement in this younger demographic and perhaps a more significant electoral impact this time round.
The other dynamic at play here is Brexit. Not only in the emerging electoral map based on the politics of Leave and Remain, but the undeniable evidence post-referendum that dramatic shifts in public opinion and the political culture of the UK are still possible. In these volatile, unpredictable times, the opportunity to reshape and remould the state and its relationship to the economy and the citizen is great.
In 2010, the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government sought to fundamentally reduce the size and scope of the British state in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. That project was ultimately derailed by Brexit.
Political scientist WH Greenleaf famously characterised British politics as an enduring cycle between the politics of libertarianism and collectivism. While governing parties may change more or less each election, the prevailing ideological view of the state and its role is generally more sticky. It shifts episodically over time.
Whether Labour can confound the polls and win an outright majority is yet to be seen. But in a period of shifting political allegiances and hung parliaments, the manifestos of losing parties outside of government carry increasing weight and moral force.
After four decades in which economic liberalism and market logic have presided over British party politics, the 2019 Labour Party manifesto may represent a decisive swing of the pendulum back towards collectivism and an interventionist state – whichever party or parties form a government after the December 12.
Quit possible what we’ve all been sitting an wondering about these two in the lime light within British Politics, this whole episode of the bleak Brexit what and,
Road trips to drum up support are an essential part of any election and 2019 has, so far, been no exception. The closer we get to polling day, the campaign trail will be crossing the country at ever more frenetic speed. But what can we tell about each of the two largest party’s electoral ambitions from where the leaders are going?
In the first 12 days of the campaign, Johnson visited 18 constituencies. Besides his visit to the Tayto crisp factory in Tandragee, Northern Ireland and a visit to Broxtowe in Nottinghamshire, where the incumbent is the former Conservative Anna Soubry, his visits have been equally split between Conservative and Labour held seats. This is a fairly cautious strategy – the Conservative seats are largely safe (usually with the Liberal Democrats in second place), so he is able to conduct his visits in relatively friendly locations.
Apart from his visit to Stainforth, which is in the ultra-safe constituency held by former Labour leader Ed Miliband, the Labour seats Johnson is visiting are marginal. This hints at a wider expansionist strategy to come later in the campaign, concentrating on the type of seats Johnson needs to gain to enable him to hold a majority. This strategy is already beginning to emerge. The Conservative battle bus was launched in Middleton – exactly the type of traditional Labour area the Conservatives want to take. Winning such seats could deliver them a thumping majority.
Wherever he is going, what seems to be characterising Johnson’s campaign trail is a very heavily orchestrated and “themed visit” strategy. He isn’t delivering many speeches to local supporters – something that David Cameron did particularly frequently in 2010, for example.
Johnson’s visits are instead themed around key policy areas – hospitals, schools and businesses. This gives him the opportunity to be pictured interacting with members of the public, appearing approachable, but with limitations to the degree of interaction. In these scenarios, people can be carefully selected for encounters with Johnson. That is not to say that these visits run without incident; after all, it was only September when Johnson was heckled at Whipps Cross Hospital.
What is perhaps surprising, however, is that Johnson’s campaign trail reflects very much what Theresa May was doing in the 2017 campaign, despite Johnson’s very different persona and his repeatedly polling more favourably than May. His strategy indicates that his team have yet to learn the lesson of a key failure of May’s campaign – if you put the leader front and centre, you also need to allow access to them.
Corbyn has hit the ground running, visiting the same number of seats as Johnson. His stop offs have included Conservative-held seats such as Pudsey, near Leeds, where the Conservatives won by just a few hundred votes in 2017, and Rossendale and Darwen, where they won by just a few thousand.
Corbyn has also been defending his own party’s territory in Crewe and Nantwich and Blackpool. These are both marginal seats, where the parties are in a close second place. There are only 48 votes in it in Crewe. No wonder Corbyn has already appeared there.
What is particularly unusual about Corbyn’s campaign so far is the amount of attention he has paid to Scotland. In 2010, for example, Gordon Brown only visited two Scottish seats towards the end of the campaign (visits to his own constituency of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath do not count). Ed Miliband went to Scotland on three different occasions in 2015, visiting one constituency each time.
Corbyn visited Scotland three times in 2017, but only on one occasion visited more than one seat in a single trip. However, in this campaign he has already completed a two-day tour of eight different Scottish constituencies, speaking to supporters, canvassing and visiting the National Mining Museum. All bar one of these constituencies are held by the SNP and are mostly marginal.
This unusual concentration on Scotland so early in the campaign shows how much importance Labour is placing on retaining its seven Scottish MPs and trying to reclaim a whisper of the dominance the party once enjoyed. It would be surprising if this is the only time we see Corbyn in Scotland during this campaign.
Despite Wales being a key area for consolidating Labour support to prevent a Johnson majority, Corbyn hasn’t been as active here, which hints that Welsh Labour is taking control of its own campaign there.
There are already rumblings that both party leaders are rarely engaging with voters in a spontaneous way in this campaign. Meeting people as they go would be a good way of boosting their popularity but, of course, it also comes with risks. When the public have been granted access to leaders on their visits, it hasn’t gone smoothly.
Corbyn was heckled in Dunfermline, Scotland, and Johnson was confronted by angry locals in Yorkshire, who asked him why he had taken so long to travel to their flood-hit region, so it’s easy to see why they might avoid improvised events.
Of course, heckling in British elections is nothing new, but the appearance of it so early in the campaign seems symptomatic of wider public dissatisfaction with politicians.
There are still many more miles for the leaders to travel and the rate of constituency visits will crescendo in the final full week of the campaign, giving us a clear guide to the expectations of the parties on polling day. However, Johnson and Corbyn’s reliance on highly structured visits provides voters with little real access, which might have been used to understand the men who are proposing to lead their country.
Make sure you prepare a safe journey for your family, relationship, friends or work colleagues.
Do More for God today then you did yesterday,
Say tomorrow I’ll do more for God then I did today.
Now turn your minimum to Maximum, to reach its upmost divine elevation.
Drive safely, use higher gears in thes bleak conditions, the roads maybe icy or possible snow.
Pedestrians on zebra crossing.
Call 999or 101 for legal authorities
In case off emergency
Please have some Forebearance an a above mannerism as all our team are day to day very busy.
Such as our Police department busy with many crimes such as theft, rakerteering, other road collisions, arsen etc.
Our NHS team services busy with sick elderly paintients such as cancer patients, knee, hip operations, heart attacks etc, also our wonderful mother’s giving birth to our children in the baby unit. Also our men an women at work hqvingany trips slips or falls at work.
Lastly but least our Firebirgade, saving our family from burning buildings home an business. Car fires, fields. Also attending our kids schools giving them the P.A.T down talk.
Fireman Sam says do not play with matches nor fires.
car incidents this month. An this week. Proclamation News an Gatherence
London
Wembley
Colchester
Clacton-on-Sea
Near Norwich
(Road an Traffic updates)
I wake up at 5:00am everyday to give you these, updates.
Why not try enhance your skills an join O2.
For me this an Castbox is all I need.
Very relevant customer service experience it’s very essential.
Also you check what latest devices they have in store also
Do you like mobile phones? Are you good at explaining things to people? Then you could be eligible to become an O2 Guru.
So just what is an O2 Guru, anyway? The Wikipedia definition for guru reads: “one who is regarded as having great knowledge, wisdom, and authority in a certain area, and who uses it to guide others”. For our O2 Gurus, that “certain area” is all things mobile!
Itʼs not all about being a clever clogs, though. We provide frequent training to all our Gurus on the latest mobile products and services, and allow plenty of time for you to stay on top of the latest technology trends. The true skill is in being able to relay that information to our customers and shop staff members in a clear and concise manner.
Thatʼs right – as well as talking to customers of all ages and knowledge levels, O2 Gurus are tasked with training their O2 team mates on the latest O2 products. Youʼll be given your own laptop to help accomplish these tasks.
Our O2 Gurus even have their own YouTube TV channel, through which they can help customers with their mobile queries. Check out O2GuruTV and see what some of them are doing to educate our customers. Weʼve been picking some of the highlights for the O2 Blog for some time now. These include how to send text messages from your O2 mobile broadband dongle, how to rescue a water-logged phone, and how to use typing shortcuts on your BlackBerry.
So what do you need to do to become an O2 Guru? Itʼs simple really – just head for our O2 Guru recruitment site, where weʼll assess whether this is the right role for you. Youʼll be asked a series of questions, and your answers will then be compared to those of our ideal O2 Guru. The whole process will only take between five and ten minutes, so why not give it a go?
If you want to learn more about what the O2 Guru role involves from an existing O2 Guru, check out the O2 Careers web page. Here you can read all about the experiences of Matt, who gives an interesting insight into a day in the life of an O2 Guru.
Want to find out more about the benefits that come from being an O2 Guru? You can read all about the perks, deals and benefits that come with the role here.
Professor Johnson inside UK politics.
So much inside todays stragdey.
So stay tuned please focus an subscribe.
UK politics an Westminster abbey is booming.
Good morning. A dreadful format meant that last night’s debate did almost nothing to change the conversation. That still matters.
Isn’t it ironically Tryanny speaking from J.Johnson Jnr. @ Proclamation and Gatherence.
Did you watch? If you didn’t, it you missed a magnificent episode. The two candidates, alongside Julie Etchingham and an audience, appeared to have been teleported to Homer Simpson’s version of the third dimension.
It was a amusing episode.
-How not to hold a debate –
And instead of a debate, we had an hour of side by side Q&As. ITV inexplicably decided to let the audience choose the questions – they were very optimistic– and selected far too many of them, which meant constantly having to move on to the next one, but rather we should be debating.
All this resulted in neither man having to show any grasp of the details and 60 minutes of soundbite repetition. (Which will suit the candidates just fine. They’ll have a mountain of social media clips to use.)
What little substance there was showed the election dividing lines we already knew about. Boris Johnson pressed Jeremy Corbyn on whether he was Leave or Remain and talked endlessly of getting Brexit done. Which for me is a good welcome gesture to showcase his skills, an more theoretically to terms speaking of which what will Jeremy Corbyn deliver.
Corbyn called into question Johnson’s commitment to the NHS and had his strongest moments talking about public services.
Who won? A YouGov snap poll called it evens, but Johnson was clearly the winner by default.
– Dull isn’t bad for some –
He took a big risk by agreeing to the debate. Corbyn is a better and more experienced debater than Johnson, and, as the incumbent, the PM had everything to lose. He had a record to defend and a substantial poll lead that would be difficult to grow.
(Indeed, the Tories seemed worried enough that one of their official Twitter accounts was altered to impersonate an impartial fact-checking service. Unsurprisingly, that’s gone down very badly.)
This Qoute isn’t my nature or my own implementations.
Another writer editor sent in a request, to show that I am not a biased presenter, an also to share different points of views.
Corbyn may have improved voters’ perceptions of him simply by being competent, but the simple fact that there wasn’t a single game-changing moment last night (in large part thanks to the format) means that Johnson came out of it better.
– What about everyone else –
The only real unknown is how it will play for the Liberal Democrats. Will they lose voters because the debate suggested that only Corbyn can stop Johnson? Or, less likely, will they get a boost from those appalled by both candidates on stage.
If it’s the former, that could yet backfire for Johnson. This election will, as much as anything, be dominated by the fight to keep 2017 voters, rather than gain new ones. So far, the Tories are doing a far better job of that, but Labour have improved over the campaign.
A more concentrated anti-Tory vote could cost Johnson a majority of seats, whether he gets a majority of votes or not.
– More where that came from –
With just three weeks to go until polling day, this election is still to catch fire. Last night didn’t provide
Labour will launch their manifesto tomorrow, while on Friday we will have the Question Time special with Johnson, Corbyn, Jo Swinson and Nicola Sturgeon.
The Tory manifesto should be on its way soon as well, and if things still haven’t got going with just a week to go, then there’s one more head-to-head debate on December 6. Let’s hope that it’s an improvement.
Apologies for the late arrival of this newsletter today. We suffered some technical gremlins.
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit | Meanwhile, the policy launches continue. Today the Conservatives turn to Law & Order. Their key announcements are a number of changes to the parole system to help victims of serious crime. They will automatically be given updates about a criminal’s sentence and release, and they will be able to request conditions for the offender’s parole. The Government also plans to open up parole hearings to the press and victims for the first time.
Johnson also announced tougher stop and search powers for police yesterday. That’s a key pledge from his leadership campaign and all part of the Tories’ return to being tough on crime.
Tax me if you’ve heard this one before | Labour, on the other hand, want s to talk about tax. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor, announced an “excess pay levy” yesterday, one of a number of policies to crack down on big business. Others include forcing all listed companies to produce a decarbonisation plan and forcing business to give at least a third of board seats to staff.
However, Labour’s plans to raise income tax were criticised by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The think tank said that while it was possible that the rise could bring in the £5.9 billion claimed, it could also end up costing the taxpayer £1 billion if the wealthy increased their tax avoidance.
More likely than you’d think | Finally, Jo Swinson refused to rule out a coalition with either Labour or the Conservatives last night. Instead, she insisted that she would not do a deal with Corbyn or Johnson. That leaves the door open to a new leader of either party.
Pre-result claims should always be taken with a pinch of salt, but Swinson’s comments do draw attention to a little considered outcome. A Tory-Lib Dem coalition seems very underpriced at the moment. Brexit aside, they are closer than the other parties on policy. Is it really that hard to imagine that, if it’s the only way to get Brexit through, the Tories might concede to a second referendum?
Pedestrians on zebra crossing.
Call 999or 101 for legal authorities
In case off emergency
Please have some Forebearance an a above mannerism as all our team are day to day very busy.
Such as our Police department busy with many crimes such as theft, rakerteering, other road collisions, arsen etc.
Our NHS team services busy with sick elderly paintients such as cancer patients, knee, hip operations, heart attacks etc, also our wonderful mother’s giving birth to our children in the baby unit. Also our men an women at work hqvingany trips slips or falls at work.
Lastly but least our Firebirgade, saving our family from burning buildings home an business. Car fires, fields. Also attending our kids schools giving them the P.A.T down talk.
Fireman Sam says do not play with matches nor fires.
car incidents this month. An this week. Proclamation News an Gatherence
Stoke on Trent
Dagenham Market
Colchester
Norwich
Potters bar
Welywn garden city
MP J Johnson 