gdp's Comments

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Which MP is backing which candidate. Our named estimates. Johnson 131, Hunt 48, Gove 36, Javid 22

Sat, 25 May 2019 15:47:02 +0000

Andrea Leadsom, but Gove would help the Union, being Scottish. BoJo would be a disaster.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:25:08 +0000

Don't you remember the conservative movement to maintain a correct legal definition of marriage back in 2014?

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:59:36 +0000

I did. The common good is defined by order, stability, health, happiness, family unity, children's welfare, things that flow from conservatism, not by a person.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:44:06 +0000

Not who. What.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:43:50 +0000

Conservative, not reactionary. And "most of the world" has not "moved on".

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:42:19 +0000

Ruth Davidson is my MSP. I have written to her on a number of occasions regarding key conservative issues, such as the right of children to a mother and a father, the right to life, and correcting the legal definition of marriage. I am sad to report huge disappointment from the replies that I have had (she generally tends to ignore me these days). I can confirm from direct personal experience that she is not actually a conservative at all, and I therefore cannot recommend her as a leader of the Conservative Party.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:33:44 +0000

That which serves the common good and protects women, children and society.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Davidson, the best hope of the Stop Johnson campaign

Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:32:39 +0000

I have encountered Gay Pride parades on a few occasions, and they were generally exhibitions of depravity and degeneracy. I have seen sights that I scarcely believe are legal in a civilised society. I now ensure my family are out of town whenever these appalling displays occur, and, as a conservative, I commend Mr Putin for prohibiting them.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Mass infiltration by UKIP activists? That's not what Conservative MPs are telling us.

Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:11:14 +0000

I've actually recently joined the Conservative party: partly to ensure that we do get the proper Brexit we voted for, but also to ensure that the next leader is an actual conservative, and that the Conservative party will start defending and promoting authentic conservatism once again. The Conservative party has been infiltrated and captured by liberals, progressives, sexual revolutionaries and anti-democratic globalist corporate Europhiles. It's time that actual conservatives had a party to vote for, and we can't complain that we don't have one unless we join, engage and participate in the Conservative party itself. Hague complains that it's bad for democracy, but how can it be bad for a democracy for voters to have democratic choices? I despise Corbyn, but at least if I was a leftist I would have someone to vote for. The homogenisation of politics, with people like Soubry, Clegg and Umunna ostensibly on opposite political sides is what has been a cancer for democracy. Britain needs authentic conservatism, and it needs an authentic conservative party to vote for.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The gathering wait for a Johnson burka inquiry decision

Thu, 16 Aug 2018 19:16:20 +0000

It's a shame the political class are more worried about offending the invaders than the fact that our children are being displaced by a hostile alien ideology imported by the very state whose job it is to protect us and preserve our country as a home for our descendents.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Political beliefs ought to be the subject of robust debate, not protected with legal cotton wool

Tue, 7 Aug 2018 08:41:13 +0000

Err, in order for political and philosophical beliefs to be criticised, they first have to be protected. I have no problem with this ruling, for the simple reason that as an authentic conservative who believes that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, that same-sex parenting is an assault on the rights of the child, and that abortion should be outlawed, I know there are lots of people who would discriminate against me.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Garvan Walshe: To win back young voters, the Conservative Party should make feminism central to its

Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:08:56 +0000

This is the kind of mentalism that has forced me to join the Conservative Party, to get rid of this toxic fifth column. Only seven percent of women identify as feminists. Most women recognise feminism as a dangerous ideology which has left them miserable, childless and frustrated, and rendered men fundamentally undesirable and weak. The smart ones have realised that feminism, or rather the postmodern Marxist pathology of which it is a part, is an existential threat. Conservatives put marriage and the family first, because that is what makes men, women and children happy and fruitful.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : WATCH: May - We want to see changes of gender demedicalised

Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:09:02 +0000

This is why conservatives have to join the Conservative party. In order to take it back from these nutcases.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Charlotte Salomon: The problem with women

Wed, 1 Aug 2018 08:27:41 +0000

There's a problem with most coverage of this topic: most men and women do not exist in isolation, they exist as one half of a complete biological unit, which has to be thought of in its own right. It's really those units that need to compared and contrasted, not the individuals within those units. In an office, you may have a man and a woman working alongside one another. However, the woman may be married to a wealthy man, whereas it's statistically unlikely that the man is married to a wealthy woman. Those two people cannot be meaningfully compared as individuals. Women have two ways of getting wealthy: working for wealth and marrying wealth. Men simply don't have the same options, they have to risk and graft. That's not factored into these facile and idiotic "gender" calculations. Real conservatives look at the family unity as an entity, and support and consider what is in the interests of that family unit. Workplace gender inequality (insofar as that's a real thing), is only one factor. It may be that it's in the interests of women to support and promote men and their careers, so that they in turn can support mothers and children. I suggest that that's closer to the authentic conservative position than individualistic (and essentially nihilistic) like for like pay comparisons. Having said that, these days I tend to go to the excellent conservativewoman.co.uk website to get understand what Conservative women think, rather than listen to those women who have ascended the Conservative Party.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : Nicky Morgan: This long, hot summer of political discontent

Tue, 31 Jul 2018 06:38:21 +0000

"As the nation’s elected representatives, the Commons, and by extension Ministers, are struggling to come up with a response to the EU referendum." How bizarre. You - the elected representatives - overwhelmingly voted to grant us a referendum on EU membership. And then you - the Conservative Party - wrote to every household in the land and told us the referendum result would be implemented. "It's your decision", I believe were the exact words. But of course, Nicky, there was never any intention of respecting a leave result, was there? I knew that the minute the result was announced. Operation Fear, when it had failed, became Operation Chaos very rapidly. Brexit was engineered by the elites to fail from the start, because they had absolutely no intention of ever respecting the vote. The clue is that remainers were put in charge of "delivering it". We should have all our ducks in a row by now, but instead the elites have been pretending that wasting their time and energy in some contorted trade deal with the EU was a prerequisite for independence. It absolutely isn't: they know that, but they are hoping we will be deceived into believing it. This strategy is a foolproof way of the corporations and bankers protecting their own interests. Whether Brexit doesn't happen because the people are gaslighted, terrified and intimidated into voting against it in a second referendum, or Brexit doesn't happen because we end up in exactly the same structures that we voted to leave, the neoliberal corporate elites will prevail. Because they always, always do, and if we ever believed that we could "vote" against it, we were cretinously naive.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The campaign for a second referendum isn't really a campaign for a second referendum

Mon, 30 Jul 2018 07:09:55 +0000

What an awful traducing of your fellow countrymen, especially the allegation that older people have calculatedly undermined the future of their children and grandchildren. I too work with young people, and I have young children. And I know exactly how successfully gaslighted they have been, how indoctrinated, and how staggeringly ignorant of the EU they are. It is clear that an orchestrated campaign of brainwashing and manipulation has been waged against them, presumably by the very people who should be educating them, and it is truly terrifying. But I would be betraying my children if I opted to consign their futures into the hand of the EU, into the hands of a self-interested corporate autocracy that has laid waste to generations of their fellow young people in countries like Greece and Spain, with 40% youth unemployment, an autocracy that exists to serve the interests of of French farmers and German manufacturers, and whose predictable failings have precipitated the rise of the far right across Europe. Oh, and yes, time and time again, whenever we have taken a step away from the creation of the insular corporate EU superstate, we have been told by the corporate elites that it would be a disaster, and we have actually ended up benefiting in the long run. Nobody doubts a certain amount of disruption as we renormalise our economy after years of EU integration, but this is a decision for our children and grandchildren, it is a strategic, not a tactical decision. So how about, instead of denigrating, terrifying and belittling the children you purport to care about, have some faith in them that they can build and thrive in a free, open, democratic, outward looking democratic sovereign nation state. Show them some encouragement, and try to be just a little bit excited that they are joining the world after so many years of subordination to the EU.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The campaign for a second referendum isn't really a campaign for a second referendum

Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:50:08 +0000

Your demographic analysis is flawed. Far more people enter the older demographic every year than become first time voters (https://www.indexmundi.com/united_kingdom/age_structure.html). It is true that young, gaslighted people are more likely to vote remain, but they grow older and wiser and less easily manipulated by the media and the corporations. The fact that the world didn't collapse, as we were told it would, on a leave vote will have convinced many that they were conned. You are forgetting that it was the older generation that took us into the EEC with a 70% majority, and these people are overwhelmingly the people voting to extricate us from the EU we now find ourselves in. These aren't Europhobes at all.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The campaign for a second referendum isn't really a campaign for a second referendum

Sun, 29 Jul 2018 07:22:04 +0000

Let's imagine there is a second referendum and that for some bizarre reason it would be decisive. In order for Remain to win would require former Leave voters to switch to Remain. The only reason they would do so would be out of fear: if they were cowards. But then, given that the entire Remain referendum campaign was based on fear (and fears that never actually materialised), it's unlikely those people would change their minds. They would never have voted Leave in the first place if they were easily intimidated, and nothing since then has made them change their minds. So, that leaves the Leave vote unchanged. What about the former Remainers? Well, I suspect that many of them would switch sides simply out of principle. There was a referendum. There was a result. The only reason for another referendum is to change the result of the first. It's actually offensive to people to suggest that their first vote didn't count and now they have to do it again. It actually disregards them. Another reason is that Vote Leave would now have far more ammunition, and more reason, than it did first time round. I voted Leave, but did not get involved in the campaign, because I thought that project fear had prevailed. I didn't think a leave result was possible. It clearly was, and so next time round I will get involved. If that happens, we will be able to point to the predatory quality of the EU that won't take no for an answer, as well as the failed doom-mongering of Project Fear Mk 1. The truth is that the only reason we would vote to remain in the EU is purely out of fear and intimidation: not because we love the institution. Do British people respond positively to fear and intimidation? It's much more likely that the corporations and bankers will work towards BRINO. A second referendum would be a huge gamble, which, if lost, would further undermine corporate hegemony, which is after all what matters to them.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The campaign for a second referendum isn't really a campaign for a second referendum

Sat, 28 Jul 2018 20:33:08 +0000

How naive, ignorant and credulous do you have to be to imagine that the bankers and the corporations will allow us to simply "leave" the EU? We didn't get a referendum on Maastricht or Lisbon, and this is no exception. Because the referendum didn't go the way Cameron gambled that it would, the process itself is now rigged to self destruct. Of course we aren't going to leave the EU, as Lionel Shriver observes, because the powerful people don't want us to. If we were free to leave the EU, it wouldn't be a neoliberal corporate autocracy in the first place. The EU takes its negotiating strategy with the UK straight out of the domestic abuser's playbook. The UK is a wealthy and beautiful woman, the EU is the ugly, violent, bullying man. But the violent man depends on her earnings, so cannot let her go. The beautiful woman, knowing deep down she has her whole life ahead of her, a life before he met her and so many better opportunities, makes a play to leave. The bullying man starts by denigrating and belittling her, then he moves on to flattery. When that doesn't work, he goes on to belittling again. It's psychological warfare. Cynical stuff. If the woman was thinking clearly, objectively and rationally, she would just walk away, the whole of her would walk away without a moment's thought. But a part of her, gaslighted, threatened and frightened, brainwashed and manipulated, keeps talking. A part of her controlled by the man refuses to let go. We are the seventh largest economy in the world. We have global ties, we have huge soft and hard power. Our freedom and our children's future awaits us. We just have to walk out of that door and not look back.

http://www.conservativehome.com/ : The campaign for a second referendum isn't really a campaign for a second referendum

Sat, 28 Jul 2018 20:31:09 +0000

Amen