"It takes a very kind of special talent to miss your target, and potentially fatally damage the career of the man you’d like to be the new Leader."
Oh, I don't know, TSE: Have you already forgotten the Brown years? James Purnell trying to defenestrate Brown in favour of David M (whatever became of him)? Harriet's little gatherings of the Furies? And, best of all, the Snow Plot?
Your comments about vibrant ecosystems and sustainable development being at the heart of countryside management are frankly risible to anyone with a real understanding of the environmental holocaust our countryside has suffered since the war. It's the arrogance of those that think the only people who know and understand the countryside are farmers and land managers that is the real arrogance here.
FWIW, we've farmed the same land for about 300 years (apart from the bit we gave to the National Trust). We've got quite a reputation for the effort we've put into developing the landscape during the period - and only now is the true vision being fulfilled.
So, with the exception of a slightly unhealthy obsession with trees, I'd say we have a very good understanding of what goes on in the countryside. And I'm not a fan of agribusinesses as a rule.
Great, sounds like we have some common ground . Wish I could talk my in laws around.....
Cable has been rubbish in government from day one. What makes anybody think he would be great as part of a political assassination plot. I don't often agree with Dan Hodges, but he highlights a number of occasions where Cable has been found to be rubbish.
Cable is great at explaining what went wrong after the fact and used to get a unbelievably friendly ride from the likes of the BBC. Under the last government, you could have been fooled for thinking Cable was the BBC's economics editor, he was on there so often for a friendly chat about what had gone wrong in the global economy.
But can anybody point to anything he has done that has really changed things for the better / worse? If nothing jumps out now, it certainly won't in 5-10 years time.
We can all point at for instance what Steve Webb has done or what Danny Alexander has had a role in.
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
"It takes a very kind of special talent to miss your target, and potentially fatally damage the career of the man you’d like to be the new Leader."
Oh, I don't know, TSE: Have you already forgotten the Brown years? James Purnell trying to defenestrate Brown in favour of David M (whatever became of him)? Harriet's little gatherings of the Furies? And, best of all, the Snow Plot?
It doesn't seem to take much talent...
1) I'm trying to repress all things to do with Gordon Brown
2) I don't think Purnell spent tens of thousands of pounds commissioning polls to damage Brown
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
Not from me for sure. I have a lot of time for Grillo. The fact that he is able to use humour as a means of getting across a serious point about Italian and European politics is a great asset to his mission, whether he is allied with Farage or not. We could do with a few more parties like Grillo's across Europe.
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
Not from me
How times change, he is comparing UKIP to Nazi stormtroopers now
"It takes a very kind of special talent to miss your target, and potentially fatally damage the career of the man you’d like to be the new Leader."
Oh, I don't know, TSE: Have you already forgotten the Brown years? James Purnell trying to defenestrate Brown in favour of David M (whatever became of him)? Harriet's little gatherings of the Furies? And, best of all, the Snow Plot?
It doesn't seem to take much talent...
Did Purnell miss his target or did he not realize he was the target.
Several current and former administration officials said in interviews that they had no issue with Mr. Messina’s working for a valued ally such as Mr. Cameron. Others, including Denis R. McDonough, the White House chief of staff, had some reservations about Mr. Messina’s taking on the Conservative Party as a client, according to several people with knowledge of the situation who asked to remain anonymous because they did not want to be seen betraying a confidence.
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
Not from me
How times change, he is comparing UKIP to Nazi stormtroopers now
Yep whilst Cameron is considering allying himself with the very same right wing parties he swore he would never do business with in Brussels.
Hopefully they will see sense and realise that the Tories are far too extremist to do business with.
Calmness under fire is admirable in a leader. A refusal to panic in the face of criticism or misfortune is one of Ed Miliband’s finest characteristics. There are times, though, when calmness can resemble complacency or somnolence. This is one of them. It is time for the Labour leader to be jolted out of his comfort zone and to recognise that his strategy for winning the next election simply isn’t working.
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
Anyone remember this pearl of wisdom from Cameron?
David Cameron branded the UK Independence Party "fruit cakes" and "closet racists" so to avoid them he is jumping into bed with
"The DPP is anti-immigration, anti-EU and anti-multiculturalism. Members of the DPP have in the past likened the headscarf worn by Muslim women to the Nazi swastika and “comparable to other totalitarian symbols.” In 2002, Morten Messerschimdt, MEP for the DPP, was convicted along with three other members of the DPP’s youth wing of incitement to racial hatred."
Seems he is not concerned with out and out racists loons and neonazi's as long as they aren't in that closet
Not from me for sure. I have a lot of time for Grillo. The fact that he is able to use humour as a means of getting across a serious point about Italian and European politics is a great asset to his mission, whether he is allied with Farage or not.
Sure, that's because you are not serious about the actual choices which need to be made in government. Beppo is engaging and entertaining. Farage is engaging and entertaining. Hell, even Lord Oakeshott is entertaining, although it would be a bit of a stretch to claim he's engaging.
Meanwhile someone has to actually make decisions about serious issues, and they are not easy to make.
Not from me for sure. I have a lot of time for Grillo. The fact that he is able to use humour as a means of getting across a serious point about Italian and European politics is a great asset to his mission, whether he is allied with Farage or not.
Sure, that's because you are not serious about the actual choices which need to be made in government. Beppo is engaging and entertaining. Farage is engaging and entertaining. Hell, even Lord Oakeshott is entertaining, although it would be a bit of a stretch to claim he's engaging.
Meanwhile someone has to actually make decisions about serious issues, and they are not easy to make.
And yet again your arrogance is overwhelming.
I assume that just as you agreed with Cameron attacking UKIP for allying with the DPP and True Finns you are now also happy to attack Cameron for wanting to do the same?
Or is the Tory streak of hypocrisy just too string.
Anyone remember this pearl of wisdom from Cameron?
David Cameron branded the UK Independence Party "fruit cakes" and "closet racists" so to avoid them he is jumping into bed with
"The DPP is anti-immigration, anti-EU and anti-multiculturalism. Members of the DPP have in the past likened the headscarf worn by Muslim women to the Nazi swastika and “comparable to other totalitarian symbols.” In 2002, Morten Messerschimdt, MEP for the DPP, was convicted along with three other members of the DPP’s youth wing of incitement to racial hatred."
Seems he is not concerned with out and out racists loons and neonazi's as long as they aren't in that closet
What a hypocritical arse the man is
Shall we wait and see what the truth is, rather than jumping to conclusions based on unbridled prejudice and an ill-informed piece in Breitbart?
Not from me for sure. I have a lot of time for Grillo. The fact that he is able to use humour as a means of getting across a serious point about Italian and European politics is a great asset to his mission, whether he is allied with Farage or not.
Sure, that's because you are not serious about the actual choices which need to be made in government. Beppo is engaging and entertaining. Farage is engaging and entertaining. Hell, even Lord Oakeshott is entertaining, although it would be a bit of a stretch to claim he's engaging.
Meanwhile someone has to actually make decisions about serious issues, and they are not easy to make.
Who were Farage's choices to ally with, the rest of the right wing is well the FN of France and that'd REALLY be seized on by the press, and then there are a whole bunch of loons to the right of FN (Jobbik etc). Slightly to the left is Merkel and even Dave, though I suspect they are too closely associated with the European project.
I was wondering who he would ally with, and the choices were thinnish tbh.
I assume that just as you agreed with Cameron attacking UKIP for allying with the DPP and True Finns you are now also happy to attack Cameron for wanting to do the same?
Or is the Tory streak of hypocrisy just too string.
At the risk of repeating myself, shall we wait and see what the truth is, rather than jumping to conclusions based on unbridled prejudice and an ill-informed piece in Breitbart? Just an idea, you know.
Who were Farage's choices to ally with, the rest of the right wing is well the FN of France and that'd REALLY be seized on by the press, and then there are a whole bunch of loons to the right of FN (Jobbik etc). Slightly to the left is Merkel and even Dave, though I suspect they are too closely associated with the European project.
I was wondering who he would ally with, and the choices were thinnish tbh.
OT, but still betting umm...I REALLY fancy Michael Laudrup for Saints Manager. He seems the perfect fit, jut the sort of guy they would want and he wants a job in the premiership.
Seems to me Labour is soft pedalling Newark. This strategy will turn out to be 'too clever by half' I think.
Old Labour voters in Newark will defect to UKIP in larger numbers IMO making the overall result too close to call.
Have to say you are certainly on the correct outsider. Both our positions have come in, so well done to both of us thus far for getting value...
Still think its Tory hold. Christ if they can't hold here then they are in trouble GE2015.
I'd agree with that. However, if UKIP does come close to taking Newark (or even achieves it), it'll be off the back of a huge collapse in Labour support. While they may rejoice in the fact of a Tory defeat, or close call, it'd be a mistake to misconstrue a genuine Lab-UKIP swing for a nascent anti-Tory coalition. A very strong UKIP score in Newark would indeed be bad news for the Tories; it'd be bad news for Labour and the Lib Dems too, though.
Anyone remember this pearl of wisdom from Cameron?
David Cameron branded the UK Independence Party "fruit cakes" and "closet racists" so to avoid them he is jumping into bed with
"The DPP is anti-immigration, anti-EU and anti-multiculturalism. Members of the DPP have in the past likened the headscarf worn by Muslim women to the Nazi swastika and “comparable to other totalitarian symbols.” In 2002, Morten Messerschimdt, MEP for the DPP, was convicted along with three other members of the DPP’s youth wing of incitement to racial hatred."
Seems he is not concerned with out and out racists loons and neonazi's as long as they aren't in that closet
What a hypocritical arse the man is
Shall we wait and see what the truth is, rather than jumping to conclusions based on unbridled prejudice and an ill-informed piece in Breitbart?
Oh I am already convinced of Cameron being a hypocritical arse along with a huge number of other voters. It is true however he hasnt sealed a deal with these people they may indeed have better sense than the lib dems so in the sense the deal isn't formalised yes we can wait. Will not change the fact that your man is a snake oil peddling janus face hypocritical arse however. Nothing short of a personality transplant would do that
EDIT: Nige is going to team up with Grillo instead
Ah yes. I seem to recall the excellent antifrank getting a huge amount of stick from the Kippers when he first pointed out the similarity between UKIP and Beppo's clowns, many months ago.
Not from me for sure. I have a lot of time for Grillo. The fact that he is able to use humour as a means of getting across a serious point about Italian and European politics is a great asset to his mission, whether he is allied with Farage or not. We could do with a few more parties like Grillo's across Europe.
Der Spiegel summarising Nicholas Farrell on Beppe Grillo:
In the Swiss magazine Weltwoche, British journalist Nicholas Farrell draws a comparison between Grillo and another famous Italian who founded his own populist movement nearly a hundred years ago: Benito Mussolini. Farrell is an expert on the fascist dictator, having written a much cited 2003 biography of Il Duce.
Mussolini also claimed that his fascist group "Fasci di Combattimento" was not a party but a movement, because political parties were the problem, not the solution. He too saw himself and his followers as cleansers who would finally clean up the frail and corrupt system. And he likewise claimed to represent the youth and freethinkers, those who no longer believed in programs and statutes but in rejuvenating action.
Farrell even finds similarities in the two men's choice of words. Whereas Mussolini spoke of parliament as a "deaf, gray hall" that he refused to enter, Grillo describes his refusal to cooperate in a similar style: "The old parties are coming to an end. They should give back what they stole, and leave. Either they follow us, or they are doomed." The mockery of the parliamentary system under the guise of true democracy is a trick that all opponents of democracy espouse, regardless of where they come from. [My emphasis]
It is easily overlooked nowadays, but fascism at its heart was a leftist movement. Mussolini never made a secret of his orgins: "I am and always will be a socialist. My convictions will never change. They are implanted into my bones," he told his comrades as they expelled him from the party at the outbreak of war in 1914 because of his pro-war stance. Farrell concludes that "Mussolini's fascism was black, Grillo's is green, but they both have a red heart."
From elsewhere in the Der Spiegel article, an excellent summary of Grillo's appeal:
Grillo derives his energy from resentment. The real key to his success lies in the exploitation of anger -- at Germany, at Brussels bureaucrats, at the whole system. That is what makes him great, not the appeal to reason or the love of democracy.
Incidentally, I don't really get this idea that Marine Le Pen is a beyond-the-pale extremist. She got 25% of the vote - just a shade below what UKIP got - on a higher turnout than in the UK. The Kippers have, quite rightly, argued that it is unreasonable to call a party for which 4.3 million people voted as extreme. Well, 4.7 million people voted for the Front National. The same argument applies, right?
Fox's suggestion that Oakeshott wanted to help Labour seems to me fundamentally mistaken. I don't want Clegg to go anywhere before May 7 2015, thanks very much. Oakeshott is just one of those people who pop up in politics who are so sure they're right that they'll go wildly overboard to make it happen.
It's odd we're not seeing any Newark polling yet - presumably will be in the Sundays. I've had zero requests to do anything there, though I'm aware of a bit of canvassing going on - certainly doesn't give the impression of a huge do-or-die effort. But, come to that, I'm on Helmer's email list and after a flurry of early emails about the campaign he's gone quiet. The only update I've had is from my former opponent, the LibDem, who has got excited on Twitter that he's won over a single voter. Isn't anyone bothering?
On topic, an excellent piece from TSE and quite right about how to (and how not to) go about getting rid of a leader.
As I've said before, there are four conditions that need to be met before a leadership change becomes viable:
- A general background of the party in question struggling, - A spark to ignite the change, - A mechanism by which the change can be made, - An alternative leader (or leaders), who it's believed would do a better job.
For the Lib Dems, the first three are more or less in place so I don't really criticise Oakshott for trying to manufacture the fourth. However, if you are going to go down that line, you need to ensure that the potential beneficiary is onside before doing so. Cable has now ruled himself out for the rest of the parliament (and therefore, given his age, for ever).
There is surely no event likely between now and next May that could cause those who are currently standing firm to waver. This was the moment and it's now gone.
Fox's suggestion that Oakeshott wanted to help Labour seems to me fundamentally mistaken. I don't want Clegg to go anywhere before May 7 2015, thanks very much. Oakeshott is just one of those people who pop up in politics who are so sure they're right that they'll go wildly overboard to make it happen.
It's odd we're not seeing any Newark polling yet - presumably will be in the Sundays. I've had zero requests to do anything there, though I'm aware of a bit of canvassing going on - certainly doesn't give the impression of a huge do-or-die effort. But, come to that, I'm on Helmer's email list and after a flurry of early emails about the campaign he's gone quiet. The only update I've had is from my former opponent, the LibDem, who has got excited on Twitter that he's won over a single voter. Isn't anyone bothering?
Well the Conservatives seem to be doing a hell of a lot of work there. Dozens of my friends have been several times. Whether the operation is as impressive as it looks who knows but it certainly looks as if the work is being done and some.
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
I've backed Groves for 1 pt at 15-8. I still think he's value at better than evens though.
Froch (and the ref) was right: Groves was out on his feet, not defending himself, and hadn't finished the fight when he could or should have earlier on. Froch goes in knowing this. Odds look about right to me.
It's probably well-known on here, but I've just found out that Nick Clegg used to be an MEP.
Quite smart really. Get your potentially best people elected as MEPs, gives them experience and exposure in an area and if they're elected an MP, no by-election is required as the next on the party list succeeds and the party retains the seat.
I mention it because UKIP are trying the same thing with Roger Helmer in Newark, as they already have with Farage in Buckingham.
Incidentally, I don't really get this idea that Marine Le Pen is a beyond-the-pale extremist. She got 25% of the vote - just a shade below what UKIP got - on a higher turnout than in the UK. The Kippers have, quite rightly, argued that it is unreasonable to call a party for which 4.3 million people voted as extreme. Well, 4.7 million people voted for the Front National. The same argument applies, right?
You haven't got a crush on Marine, have you Richard?
Incidentally, I don't really get this idea that Marine Le Pen is a beyond-the-pale extremist. She got 25% of the vote - just a shade below what UKIP got - on a higher turnout than in the UK. The Kippers have, quite rightly, argued that it is unreasonable to call a party for which 4.3 million people voted as extreme. Well, 4.7 million people voted for the Front National. The same argument applies, right?
You haven't got a crush on Marine, have you Richard?
NO! I certainly wouldn't vote for her, but then, I certainly wouldn't vote for Farage either, although I admit he's more photogenic!
Fox's suggestion that Oakeshott wanted to help Labour seems to me fundamentally mistaken. I don't want Clegg to go anywhere before May 7 2015, thanks very much. Oakeshott is just one of those people who pop up in politics who are so sure they're right that they'll go wildly overboard to make it happen.
It's odd we're not seeing any Newark polling yet - presumably will be in the Sundays. I've had zero requests to do anything there, though I'm aware of a bit of canvassing going on - certainly doesn't give the impression of a huge do-or-die effort. But, come to that, I'm on Helmer's email list and after a flurry of early emails about the campaign he's gone quiet. The only update I've had is from my former opponent, the LibDem, who has got excited on Twitter that he's won over a single voter. Isn't anyone bothering?
This is the latest I have from Roger. Mind you, it can't be much fun canvassing in this foul weather.
Roger Helmer @RogerHelmerMEP · 6h Canvassing in Bingham: overwhelmingly the best results I have ever seen in 15 years. Two thirds will vote #UKIP, or have done so already.
Incidentally, I don't really get this idea that Marine Le Pen is a beyond-the-pale extremist. She got 25% of the vote - just a shade below what UKIP got - on a higher turnout than in the UK. The Kippers have, quite rightly, argued that it is unreasonable to call a party for which 4.3 million people voted as extreme. Well, 4.7 million people voted for the Front National. The same argument applies, right?
I am not sure who you are addressing. From a personal viewpoint whether she is or isn't is irrelevant it is the french electorates view that counts as she is a french politician. I have neither say nor influence on her election.
There are people who have been banging the "Racist alert drum" and there are those that haven't. Those that have are now allegedly trying to do deals with people in other cultures with far more "wide ranging views on certain subjects" than those politicians that they decry with the "racist alert" meme.
I see tonight news that the new ukip councillor who made homophobic tweets has already been given the heave ho from the so called party of bigots,homophobes and racists would you care to enlighten us what happened to Chris Windows in Bristol ah thats right three years after being complained about for his comments about Ian mckellen he was not only still a tory councillor but being touted as possible mayor by the Dave party.
Live by the sword Nabavi and you will die by it. You label people as beyond the pale and closet racists do not be surprised when people call your idiot a hypocrite when he happily beds down with such people and excuses those very traits in his own party
On topic, an excellent piece from TSE and quite right about how to (and how not to) go about getting rid of a leader.
As I've said before, there are four conditions that need to be met before a leadership change becomes viable:
- A general background of the party in question struggling, - A spark to ignite the change, - A mechanism by which the change can be made, - An alternative leader (or leaders), who it's believed would do a better job.
For the Lib Dems, the first three are more or less in place so I don't really criticise Oakshott for trying to manufacture the fourth. However, if you are going to go down that line, you need to ensure that the potential beneficiary is onside before doing so. Cable has now ruled himself out for the rest of the parliament (and therefore, given his age, for ever).
There is surely no event likely between now and next May that could cause those who are currently standing firm to waver. This was the moment and it's now gone.
The trouble is Oakeshott made a horlicks of it. Had he resigned from the Lib Dems and released the polling simultaneously as the Euro results came in it may have caused more trouble. Not guaranteed of course, we have the Purnell example but it may have caused others to speak out who have remained silent. With these things the best way is not to attempt a kind of broad front approach as here but to concentrate your attack and hope it punches through. As it is he has made his friend look duplicitous and untrustworthy, the party leader look compromised and weak, the party look divided and like a man on the gallows waiting for the trapdoor to open. As an executioner he makes Jack Ketch look competent!
Incidentally, I don't really get this idea that Marine Le Pen is a beyond-the-pale extremist. She got 25% of the vote - just a shade below what UKIP got - on a higher turnout than in the UK. The Kippers have, quite rightly, argued that it is unreasonable to call a party for which 4.3 million people voted as extreme. Well, 4.7 million people voted for the Front National. The same argument applies, right?
And how many votes did Adolf Hitler get in his elections?
May I suggest that you and AveryLP follow Mark Senior's example and cease posting until Euro Election Fever has passed through your respective systems and you've thought about the disgraceful conduct of the Tory election campaign a bit more?
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
I've backed Groves for 1 pt at 15-8. I still think he's value at better than evens though.
Froch (and the ref) was right: Groves was out on his feet, not defending himself, and hadn't finished the fight when he could or should have earlier on. Froch goes in knowing this. Odds look about right to me.
So why was an immediate rematch ordered ?
Before you say the cash, a rematch would have happened anyway and Groves has lost out financially because the authority ordered it rather than it happening the normal way.
Live by the sword Nabavi and you will die by it. You label people as beyond the pale and closet racists do not be surprised when people call your idiot a hypocrite when he happily beds down with such people and excuses those very traits in his own party
I'm impressed by you quoting a post where I specifically said a politician was NOT beyond the pale as meaning I was labelling 'people as beyond the pale'. You might want to rethink the logic there.
Nick Clegg should put his leadership to a vote of Liberal Democrat members, according to leading activists.
In a letter to The Times today, the Social Liberal Forum, which represents left-leaning supporters, calls for a “leadership . . . that people listen to”. Its two chairmen say that the loss of more than 300 councillors and 10 out of 11 MEPs cannot be blamed solely on being in the coalition and call for a strategy rethink.
“It is right that this debate should include who leads the party. As a democratic party, the membership will hold the key to this re-examination,” they add in a call for a leadership ballot.
Fox's suggestion that Oakeshott wanted to help Labour seems to me fundamentally mistaken. I don't want Clegg to go anywhere before May 7 2015, thanks very much. Oakeshott is just one of those people who pop up in politics who are so sure they're right that they'll go wildly overboard to make it happen.
It's odd we're not seeing any Newark polling yet - presumably will be in the Sundays. I've had zero requests to do anything there, though I'm aware of a bit of canvassing going on - certainly doesn't give the impression of a huge do-or-die effort. But, come to that, I'm on Helmer's email list and after a flurry of early emails about the campaign he's gone quiet. The only update I've had is from my former opponent, the LibDem, who has got excited on Twitter that he's won over a single voter. Isn't anyone bothering?
This is the latest I have from Roger. Mind you, it can't be much fun canvassing in this foul weather.
Roger Helmer @RogerHelmerMEP · 6h Canvassing in Bingham: overwhelmingly the best results I have ever seen in 15 years. Two thirds will vote #UKIP, or have done so already.
The trouble is there are plenty of duplicitous people in this world. I would never give my true intentions if I were canvassed. Also I've canvassed wards in my area that ended up giving us 80% of the vote! the full canvass returns were barely over 50. I always smell a rat if canvass returns are too good or are claimed to be. Mostly when canvassing by the the largest column is that where nobody was in.
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
I've backed Groves for 1 pt at 15-8. I still think he's value at better than evens though.
Froch (and the ref) was right: Groves was out on his feet, not defending himself, and hadn't finished the fight when he could or should have earlier on. Froch goes in knowing this. Odds look about right to me.
So why was an immediate rematch ordered ?
Before you say the cash, a rematch would have happened anyway and Groves has lost out financially because the authority ordered it rather than it happening the normal way.
Boxing desperately needs controversy, grudges, tension. They got that in spades with Froch-Groves I. Look at Groves in the later rounds. He turns away, Froch is getting free shots. No question it should have been stopped. But, of course it's box office so the rematch.
Every stopped fighter is stopped too soon. That's probably a good thing. I'm looking forward to the fight and think that Froch will edge it as the older pro.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
Live by the sword Nabavi and you will die by it. You label people as beyond the pale and closet racists do not be surprised when people call your idiot a hypocrite when he happily beds down with such people and excuses those very traits in his own party
I'm impressed by you quoting a post where I specifically said a politician was NOT beyond the pale as meaning I was labelling 'people as beyond the pale'. You might want to rethink the logic there.
It's not logic but anger which drives them, Richard.
It won't be long before they start calling for their critics to be silent, then when that doesn't work, silenced.
Calmness under fire is admirable in a leader. A refusal to panic in the face of criticism or misfortune is one of Ed Miliband’s finest characteristics. There are times, though, when calmness can resemble complacency or somnolence. This is one of them. It is time for the Labour leader to be jolted out of his comfort zone and to recognise that his strategy for winning the next election simply isn’t working.
While I agree with most of what she says, I'd love to know who she thinks all Labour's "normal people" who would connect with people are. Apart from Burnham, very few of them are any less weird or boring than Ed. I find it hilarious that she suggests Mary Creagh as a "talented communicator"; she has to be the single least impressive politician I've ever come across.
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
Hard to say. The case for Froch just having one too many is certainly there even if his fitness is always immaculate. On paper the odds should be closer but Froch is a proven commodity. Groves, although very good, is not yet.
I like Groves and he's made me money in the past when he beat DeGale. I've not missed watching a single fight he's had since. He has the typical toolbox that Froch always finds extremely problematic; good movement, decent speed to the punch and a fairly loose style (witness Froch's fights with Dirrell, Ward and, before he pummelled him, Taylor). Froch is slow, has genuinely limited boxing skill for a man at the top of the tree. On skill level Groves has this fight and could just shut Froch out.
Froch, however, is not your commonal garden individual. He is a thinker and to that end can out-think himself but he has a chin like granite and an intangible factor that has elevated him to the top of the tree when really, he plain shouldn't be there. He also tends not to mess up twice. Happens to hit very hard in a concussive sense in that he may not put you down with a single shot but it stays with you. Groves, by the way, is potentially a touch chinny. His fight with Kenny Anderson lives in the memory.
I am a huge fan of Froch. To that end I'd like to see him pull it off, Groves can have his time soon enough. Gun to head I think he will as I suspect he'll seek to crowd Groves out early with sustained rushes that Groves will not be able to avoid every round and also just find hard to keep with the pace that Froch may set. I have my doubts however, as I do with nearly every Froch fight, I'll be sitting it out betting-wise
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
I've backed Groves for 1 pt at 15-8. I still think he's value at better than evens though.
Froch (and the ref) was right: Groves was out on his feet, not defending himself, and hadn't finished the fight when he could or should have earlier on. Froch goes in knowing this. Odds look about right to me.
So why was an immediate rematch ordered ?
Before you say the cash, a rematch would have happened anyway and Groves has lost out financially because the authority ordered it rather than it happening the normal way.
Boxing desperately needs controversy, grudges, tension. They got that in spades with Froch-Groves I. Look at Groves in the later rounds. He turns away, Froch is getting free shots. No question it should have been stopped. But, of course it's box office so the rematch.
Every stopped fighter is stopped too soon. That's probably a good thing. I'm looking forward to the fight and think that Froch will edge it as the older pro.
Froch has been in alot of wars, that has to catch up with him at some point. He's no Hopkins, aggressive fighters like him who have taken alot of punishment as well as dished it out get old fast.
Groves is an improving young fighter, his first fight enhances his chances in this one I'd say.
Froch has been Britain's top fighter, ducking noone and full, top credit to him for fighting Ward, Kessler, Bute, Taylor, Dirrell.
It's not logic but anger which drives them, Richard.
It won't be long before they start calling for their critics to be silenced.
The amusing thing is that I wasn't even criticising them! I was talking about Ms Le Pen, who is clearly a serious force in France, with her curious mixture of xenophobia and advocating old-style left-wing state intervention in the economy. It looks to me like a pretty barmy mixture, but 4.7 million people voted for it.
Live by the sword Nabavi and you will die by it. You label people as beyond the pale and closet racists do not be surprised when people call your idiot a hypocrite when he happily beds down with such people and excuses those very traits in his own party
I'm impressed by you quoting a post where I specifically said a politician was NOT beyond the pale as meaning I was labelling 'people as beyond the pale'. You might want to rethink the logic there.
The "you" in this post was a group you as in "you the conservative party" as you(singular Nabavi) well know. No one(people reading this who are not tory shills) is impressed by your(singular Nabavi) attempt to wriggle based on semantics. Everyone(people reading this who are not tory shills) else I am sure knew exactly who that you(plural meaning the conservative party) referred to. However as you(singular Nabavi) seem unable to grasp the concept of you used as a plural I might suggest you also may wish to avoid meeting the queen as she often refers to herself as we....wouldn't want you (singular as in Nabavi) getting confused now would we(plural meaning readers of PB and not the queen or any other royal)?
I will try and remember though from now on to refer to you(Tory) and you(Nabavi) to assist you in your reading comprehension. Should that fail I will attempt to put my posts in the form of a graphic novel perhaps
It's not logic but anger which drives them, Richard.
It won't be long before they start calling for their critics to be silenced.
The amusing thing is that I wasn't even criticising them! I was talking about Ms Le Pen, who is clearly a serious force in France, with her curious mixture of xenophobia and advocating old-style left-wing state intervention in the economy. It looks to me like a pretty barmy mixture, but 4.7 million people voted for it.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
He is divisive for sure, but also genuinely popular in Tower Hamlets I think.
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
A ban on mass physical intimidation seems more to the point.
Can't see the police managing that across an entire borough for a month.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
He is divisive for sure, but also genuinely popular in Tower Hamlets I think.
Oh I'm sure he is, but there shouldn't be any suspicion of sharp practice in the conduct of an election. That there are documented allegations of things not being entirely above board means that we cannot have confidence in the declared outcome. We cannot leave such things entirely without challenge because then malpractice will become entrenched.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
He is divisive for sure, but also genuinely popular in Tower Hamlets I think.
This in merely my opinion here and for once I am being semi serious. I think letting the threat (if it is corroborated) stand without a challenge is a bad precedent to set regardless of who or which party that person belongs to.
Once we let a threat like this stand it gives others carte blanche to try the same. Even if we believed the entire election to be open and above board (though hopefully such a threat would not occur in such a situation) a verified statement like this from a senior member of one of the electoral teams should be more than sufficient grounds to nullify the election and hold the vote again with strict safeguards in place.
Democracy is only as good as the integrity of the vote. Even if there is the appearance of irregularities we should rerun as once people no longer believe in the actual integrity of the ballot the very idea of democracy becomes nothing but a farce.
The police should be investigating. If they believe a credible threat was made then the person making it should be on trial for electoral crimes. The ballot rerun and if all the electoral team including the candidate disbarred if it is believed they were party to it.
Democracy is to important to play around and be PC about. We just killed a half million iraqis in the name of democracy let us remember.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
Gosh, the racism and entitlement just oozes from this post.
Just because a non-White person from outside LibLabCon got himself re-elected as mayor, it doesn't entitle you to overturn the democratic result.
And the Conservatives have got nowhere near controlling the council or mayoralty, so why do you care?
Kippers, expect the same treatment yourselves. Oh, I forgot. You're already getting it.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
He is divisive for sure, but also genuinely popular in Tower Hamlets I think.
This in merely my opinion here and for once I am being semi serious. I think letting the threat (if it is corroborated) stand without a challenge is a bad precedent to set regardless of who or which party that person belongs to.
Once we let a threat like this stand it gives others carte blanche to try the same. Even if we believed the entire election to be open and above board (though hopefully such a threat would not occur in such a situation) a verified statement like this from a senior member of one of the electoral teams should be more than sufficient grounds to nullify the election and hold the vote again with strict safeguards in place.
Democracy is only as good as the integrity of the vote. Even if there is the appearance of irregularities we should rerun as once people no longer believe in the actual integrity of the ballot the very idea of democracy becomes nothing but a farce.
The police should be investigating. If they believe a credible threat was made then the person making it should be on trial for electoral crimes. The ballot rerun and if all the electoral team including the candidate disbarred if it is believed they were party to it.
Democracy is to important to play around and be PC about. We just killed a half million iraqis in the name of democracy let us remember.
Good God, Zen, you should be serious more often! An excellent post.
The electoral process must not only be fair and lawful, it is vital it is perceived as such.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
A ban on mass physical intimidation seems more to the point.
Can't see the police managing that across an entire borough for a month.
I believe my suggestions would solve the problem because we have a secret ballot. Yes I accept the police wouldn't be able to prevent all intimidation but stopping postal votes would prevent any pressure being brought to bear in the home etc. removing tellers for a rerun election would prevent people having to run a gauntlet to vote and the intimidation etc that can be felt. Other than that not sure what can be done but democracy is a precious thing and we should be jealous guardians of the integrity of the vote.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
Gosh, the racism and entitlement just oozes from this post.
Just because a non-White person from outside LibLabCon got himself re-elected as mayor, it doesn't entitle you to overturn the democratic result.
And the Conservatives have got nowhere near controlling the council or mayoralty, so why do you care?
Kippers, expect the same treatment yourselves. Oh, I forgot. You're already getting it.
Sorry much as I disagree with ToryJim on virtually every post he has ever made, has thought of making but then not bothered or will make I have to agree with him on this. It is not about the race it is about the irregularity itself I would say the same if it happened in an all white election between lib, lab and con.
Democracy is important and its integrity has to be unimpeachable. Any whiff of impropriety must be dealt with quickly and ruthlessly.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
I have to agree that all recent leadership plots have been a disaster.
The various plotters so fear being caught out in "plotting", that they become too cryptic with their fellow plotters, too oblique in their individual plotting intentions, that they fail to intersect when the crucial moment for co-operative action arrives.
Good God, Zen, you should be serious more often! An excellent post.
The electoral process must not only be fair and lawful, it is vital it is perceived as such.
Life is not serious on the whole, it merely has points in it which occasionally need to be treated seriously. On the whole approaching life with a smile and a sense of the inappropriate is the recipe for a happy life whether long or short
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
From all the various reports about this borough I just don't think we can have sufficient confidence that the election met the exacting standards we have come to expect. I think there is a prima facie case for nullifying the election results in that borough and having a rerun, although special measures may have to be put in place first such as no postal votes and a ban on tellers etc.
Gosh, the racism and entitlement just oozes from this post.
Just because a non-White person from outside LibLabCon got himself re-elected as mayor, it doesn't entitle you to overturn the democratic result.
And the Conservatives have got nowhere near controlling the council or mayoralty, so why do you care?
Kippers, expect the same treatment yourselves. Oh, I forgot. You're already getting it.
Excuse me but I couldn't care less who he is or what he looks like. There have been multiple allegations of behaviour and practices that may well call into question the result of this election in this borough. Of course overturning elections is serious and isn't something to be done lightly but we absolutely MUST be able to trust that the process is fair, equitable and arrives at an outcome that is the genuine reflection of the will of the people. We absolutely should be ruthlessly zealous in ensuring the credibility and integrity of the ballot whoever is threatening it and wherever they may be.
Excuse me but I couldn't care less who he is or what he looks like. There have been multiple allegations of behaviour and practices that may well call into question the result of this election in this borough. Of course overturning elections is serious and isn't something to be done lightly but we absolutely MUST be able to trust that the process is fair, equitable and arrives at an outcome that is the genuine reflection of the will of the people. We absolutely should be ruthlessly zealous in ensuring the credibility and integrity of the ballot whoever is threatening it and wherever they may be.
Yep, it's just a coincidence that the mayor is Bangladeshi and doesn't belong to LibLabCon and the Tory leader is gay.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
Blow me down, is someone holding two race cards tonight with Broadway showing on the flop, turn and river? Anyone wondering why UKIP are flavour of the month should just read this thread. The establishments total inability to say anything without crapping themselves about offending someone, Tower Hamlets, always above board, even when three million votes are cast.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
Excuse me but I couldn't care less who he is or what he looks like. There have been multiple allegations of behaviour and practices that may well call into question the result of this election in this borough. Of course overturning elections is serious and isn't something to be done lightly but we absolutely MUST be able to trust that the process is fair, equitable and arrives at an outcome that is the genuine reflection of the will of the people. We absolutely should be ruthlessly zealous in ensuring the credibility and integrity of the ballot whoever is threatening it and wherever they may be.
Yep, it's just a coincidence that the mayor is Bangladeshi and doesn't belong to LibLabCon and the Tory leader is gay.
Yep, just a coincidence.
Let me spell it out once more. I couldn't care less who it is, what he looks like, what part of the world he is in or what party he represents. If an election is conducted that is subject to allegations of irregular practices that is a direct existential threat to the concept of democracy. For me democracy is far more important than any notion of party. If this was a Conservative I would want it investigated and the election rerun, if it were Labour, Lib Dem, UKIP, Green, SNP, Plaid, or whoever. The integrity of elections is far more important than who emerges from them the victor.
I don't dislike the outcome of this election because of who has won it, I dislike the outcome because it appears this election did not live up to the standards we demand. If there were no question marks over the conduct of this election then I wouldn't have a problem with the outcome.
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
If Mr Gilligan is reporting correctly, it looks like Labour is really going to need its UAF/HateNotHope street fighting wing in one constituency.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
Comments
Oh, I don't know, TSE: Have you already forgotten the Brown years? James Purnell trying to defenestrate Brown in favour of David M (whatever became of him)? Harriet's little gatherings of the Furies? And, best of all, the Snow Plot?
It doesn't seem to take much talent...
Cable is great at explaining what went wrong after the fact and used to get a unbelievably friendly ride from the likes of the BBC. Under the last government, you could have been fooled for thinking Cable was the BBC's economics editor, he was on there so often for a friendly chat about what had gone wrong in the global economy.
But can anybody point to anything he has done that has really changed things for the better / worse? If nothing jumps out now, it certainly won't in 5-10 years time.
We can all point at for instance what Steve Webb has done or what Danny Alexander has had a role in.
2) I don't think Purnell spent tens of thousands of pounds commissioning polls to damage Brown
How times change, he is comparing UKIP to Nazi stormtroopers now
Several current and former administration officials said in interviews that they had no issue with Mr. Messina’s working for a valued ally such as Mr. Cameron. Others, including Denis R. McDonough, the White House chief of staff, had some reservations about Mr. Messina’s taking on the Conservative Party as a client, according to several people with knowledge of the situation who asked to remain anonymous because they did not want to be seen betraying a confidence.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/05/28/us/politics/obama-crowd-blanches-as-ex-aide-jim-messina-helps-british-conservatives.html?emc=edit_cn_20140528&nl=us&nlid=46753750&_r=0&referrer=
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers
Mandelson in @Spectator: Miliband must get 'act together' and drop 'crowd-pleasing' cost of living pledges http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2642042/Lord-Mandelson-says-Ed-Miliband-needs-abandon-crowd-pleasing-counter-UKIP.html …
Hopefully they will see sense and realise that the Tories are far too extremist to do business with.
Still think its Tory hold. Christ if they can't hold here then they are in trouble GE2015.
Mandelson in @Spectator: Miliband must get 'act together' and drop 'crowd-pleasing' cost of living pledges http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2642042/Lord-Mandelson-says-Ed-Miliband-needs-abandon-crowd-pleasing-counter-UKIP.html …
David Cameron branded the UK Independence Party "fruit cakes" and "closet racists" so to avoid them he is jumping into bed with
"The DPP is anti-immigration, anti-EU and anti-multiculturalism. Members of the DPP have in the past likened the headscarf worn by Muslim women to the Nazi swastika and “comparable to other totalitarian symbols.” In 2002, Morten Messerschimdt, MEP for the DPP, was convicted along with three other members of the DPP’s youth wing of incitement to racial hatred."
Seems he is not concerned with out and out racists loons and neonazi's as long as they aren't in that closet
What a hypocritical arse the man is
Meanwhile someone has to actually make decisions about serious issues, and they are not easy to make.
I assume that just as you agreed with Cameron attacking UKIP for allying with the DPP and True Finns you are now also happy to attack Cameron for wanting to do the same?
Or is the Tory streak of hypocrisy just too string.
I was wondering who he would ally with, and the choices were thinnish tbh.
Froch 8/11 v Groves 11/8.
More your subject than mine but haven't the bookies got this the wrong way round? Isn't this a fight too far for the admirable old champ?
UKIP 10,027 (32.4%)
Con 9,641 (31.2%)
Lab 6,601 (21.4%)
LD 1,889 (6.1%)
Green 1,513 (4.9%)
AIFE 473 (1.5%)
BNP 445 (1.4%)
Eng Dem 279 (0.9%)
Harmony 42 (0.1%)
Sherwood is a better area for Labour than Newark.
http://www.newark-sherwooddc.gov.uk/vote/europeanparliamentaryelection2014/
In the Swiss magazine Weltwoche, British journalist Nicholas Farrell draws a comparison between Grillo and another famous Italian who founded his own populist movement nearly a hundred years ago: Benito Mussolini. Farrell is an expert on the fascist dictator, having written a much cited 2003 biography of Il Duce.
Mussolini also claimed that his fascist group "Fasci di Combattimento" was not a party but a movement, because political parties were the problem, not the solution. He too saw himself and his followers as cleansers who would finally clean up the frail and corrupt system. And he likewise claimed to represent the youth and freethinkers, those who no longer believed in programs and statutes but in rejuvenating action.
Farrell even finds similarities in the two men's choice of words. Whereas Mussolini spoke of parliament as a "deaf, gray hall" that he refused to enter, Grillo describes his refusal to cooperate in a similar style: "The old parties are coming to an end. They should give back what they stole, and leave. Either they follow us, or they are doomed." The mockery of the parliamentary system under the guise of true democracy is a trick that all opponents of democracy espouse, regardless of where they come from. [My emphasis]
It is easily overlooked nowadays, but fascism at its heart was a leftist movement. Mussolini never made a secret of his orgins: "I am and always will be a socialist. My convictions will never change. They are implanted into my bones," he told his comrades as they expelled him from the party at the outbreak of war in 1914 because of his pro-war stance. Farrell concludes that "Mussolini's fascism was black, Grillo's is green, but they both have a red heart."
From elsewhere in the Der Spiegel article, an excellent summary of Grillo's appeal:
Grillo derives his energy from resentment. The real key to his success lies in the exploitation of anger -- at Germany, at Brussels bureaucrats, at the whole system. That is what makes him great, not the appeal to reason or the love of democracy.
Some comedian, eh?
It's odd we're not seeing any Newark polling yet - presumably will be in the Sundays. I've had zero requests to do anything there, though I'm aware of a bit of canvassing going on - certainly doesn't give the impression of a huge do-or-die effort. But, come to that, I'm on Helmer's email list and after a flurry of early emails about the campaign he's gone quiet. The only update I've had is from my former opponent, the LibDem, who has got excited on Twitter that he's won over a single voter. Isn't anyone bothering?
As I've said before, there are four conditions that need to be met before a leadership change becomes viable:
- A general background of the party in question struggling,
- A spark to ignite the change,
- A mechanism by which the change can be made,
- An alternative leader (or leaders), who it's believed would do a better job.
For the Lib Dems, the first three are more or less in place so I don't really criticise Oakshott for trying to manufacture the fourth. However, if you are going to go down that line, you need to ensure that the potential beneficiary is onside before doing so. Cable has now ruled himself out for the rest of the parliament (and therefore, given his age, for ever).
There is surely no event likely between now and next May that could cause those who are currently standing firm to waver. This was the moment and it's now gone.
UKIP did tremendously well up here in NE Derbyshire and its more Sherwood than Newark.
Quite smart really. Get your potentially best people elected as MEPs, gives them experience and exposure in an area and if they're elected an MP, no by-election is required as the next on the party list succeeds and the party retains the seat.
I mention it because UKIP are trying the same thing with Roger Helmer in Newark, as they already have with Farage in Buckingham.
"Rarely can a coup attempt have failed so spectacularly”
Has he forgotten Hoon and Hewitt ALREADY ?
Seems ok
Roger Helmer @RogerHelmerMEP · 6h
Canvassing in Bingham: overwhelmingly the best results I have ever seen in 15 years. Two thirds will vote #UKIP, or have done so already.
There are people who have been banging the "Racist alert drum" and there are those that haven't. Those that have are now allegedly trying to do deals with people in other cultures with far more "wide ranging views on certain subjects" than those politicians that they decry with the "racist alert" meme.
I see tonight news that the new ukip councillor who made homophobic tweets has already been given the heave ho from the so called party of bigots,homophobes and racists would you care to enlighten us what happened to Chris Windows in Bristol ah thats right three years after being complained about for his comments about Ian mckellen he was not only still a tory councillor but being touted as possible mayor by the Dave party.
Live by the sword Nabavi and you will die by it. You label people as beyond the pale and closet racists do not be surprised when people call your idiot a hypocrite when he happily beds down with such people and excuses those very traits in his own party
May I suggest that you and AveryLP follow Mark Senior's example and cease posting until Euro Election Fever has passed through your respective systems and you've thought about the disgraceful conduct of the Tory election campaign a bit more?
Before you say the cash, a rematch would have happened anyway and Groves has lost out financially because the authority ordered it rather than it happening the normal way.
In a letter to The Times today, the Social Liberal Forum, which represents left-leaning supporters, calls for a “leadership . . . that people listen to”. Its two chairmen say that the loss of more than 300 councillors and 10 out of 11 MEPs cannot be blamed solely on being in the coalition and call for a strategy rethink.
“It is right that this debate should include who leads the party. As a democratic party, the membership will hold the key to this re-examination,” they add in a call for a leadership ballot.
Every stopped fighter is stopped too soon. That's probably a good thing. I'm looking forward to the fight and think that Froch will edge it as the older pro.
"Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the opposition on the council, said: “I am gobsmacked. This is actually a threat of violence. Given what we know of the mayor’s ability to bring people out on to the streets, this is deeply disturbing.” "
A couple of questions..
Are they actually reliable against this new opponent?
How many other, soon to be ex-labour, strongholds will follow the successful example of Mr Rahman?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/local-elections/10861289/Support-Tower-Hamlets-mayor-or-risk-riots-says-advisor.html
It won't be long before they start calling for their critics to be silent, then when that doesn't work, silenced.
While I agree with most of what she says, I'd love to know who she thinks all Labour's "normal people" who would connect with people are. Apart from Burnham, very few of them are any less weird or boring than Ed. I find it hilarious that she suggests Mary Creagh as a "talented communicator"; she has to be the single least impressive politician I've ever come across.
I like Groves and he's made me money in the past when he beat DeGale. I've not missed watching a single fight he's had since. He has the typical toolbox that Froch always finds extremely problematic; good movement, decent speed to the punch and a fairly loose style (witness Froch's fights with Dirrell, Ward and, before he pummelled him, Taylor). Froch is slow, has genuinely limited boxing skill for a man at the top of the tree. On skill level Groves has this fight and could just shut Froch out.
Froch, however, is not your commonal garden individual. He is a thinker and to that end can out-think himself but he has a chin like granite and an intangible factor that has elevated him to the top of the tree when really, he plain shouldn't be there. He also tends not to mess up twice. Happens to hit very hard in a concussive sense in that he may not put you down with a single shot but it stays with you. Groves, by the way, is potentially a touch chinny. His fight with Kenny Anderson lives in the memory.
I am a huge fan of Froch. To that end I'd like to see him pull it off, Groves can have his time soon enough. Gun to head I think he will as I suspect he'll seek to crowd Groves out early with sustained rushes that Groves will not be able to avoid every round and also just find hard to keep with the pace that Froch may set. I have my doubts however, as I do with nearly every Froch fight, I'll be sitting it out betting-wise
Groves is an improving young fighter, his first fight enhances his chances in this one I'd say.
Froch has been Britain's top fighter, ducking noone and full, top credit to him for fighting Ward, Kessler, Bute, Taylor, Dirrell.
But I think Groves has his number.
I will try and remember though from now on to refer to you(Tory) and you(Nabavi) to assist you in your reading comprehension. Should that fail I will attempt to put my posts in the form of a graphic novel perhaps
Note attempt at applying new symbol.
Votes are counted not weighed.
The Ancient Greeks had it right.
Once we let a threat like this stand it gives others carte blanche to try the same. Even if we believed the entire election to be open and above board (though hopefully such a threat would not occur in such a situation) a verified statement like this from a senior member of one of the electoral teams should be more than sufficient grounds to nullify the election and hold the vote again with strict safeguards in place.
Democracy is only as good as the integrity of the vote. Even if there is the appearance of irregularities we should rerun as once people no longer believe in the actual integrity of the ballot the very idea of democracy becomes nothing but a farce.
The police should be investigating. If they believe a credible threat was made then the person making it should be on trial for electoral crimes. The ballot rerun and if all the electoral team including the candidate disbarred if it is believed they were party to it.
Democracy is to important to play around and be PC about. We just killed a half million iraqis in the name of democracy let us remember.
The hypothesis is best tested in reversal:
Being demented triples risk of cyncicism.
Shakespeare had it right:
He's mad that trusts in the tameness of a wolf, a horse's health, a boy's love, a whore's oath, or Farage's promises.
[King Lear (Internet Edition)]
Hope it is another Benn-Eubank, Haggler-Hearns. Oh I'd be happy to lose my very modest stake if it has rounds like those.
Will Froch start any faster than he normally does. If he doesn't he'll be relying on a late KO !
Just because a non-White person from outside LibLabCon got himself re-elected as mayor, it doesn't entitle you to overturn the democratic result.
And the Conservatives have got nowhere near controlling the council or mayoralty, so why do you care?
Kippers, expect the same treatment yourselves. Oh, I forgot. You're already getting it.
The electoral process must not only be fair and lawful, it is vital it is perceived as such.
Democracy is important and its integrity has to be unimpeachable. Any whiff of impropriety must be dealt with quickly and ruthlessly.
"Another example of a problem that started small 30-40 years ago and could have been nipped in the bud but wasn't and is now a massive problem."
Yes. Now its probably to big to deal with.
Rahman is obviously popular with a very large group. The police are almost certainly incapable over the medium term. His methods will prevail.
Labour will run away.
The various plotters so fear being caught out in "plotting", that they become too cryptic with their fellow plotters, too oblique in their individual plotting intentions, that they fail to intersect when the crucial moment for co-operative action arrives.
If the people vote the wrong result, they must vote again until the right one is achieved.
That would be my guess.
Yep, just a coincidence.
"but we absolutely MUST be able to trust that the process is fair, equitable and.."
This "we" - who is it?
Its not Mr Rahman's constituency - they are quite happy with their customary practices (including intimidation) apparently.
What are you going to do - coerce a community?
Anyone wondering why UKIP are flavour of the month should just read this thread. The establishments total inability to say anything without crapping themselves about offending someone,
Tower Hamlets, always above board, even when three million votes are cast.
I don't dislike the outcome of this election because of who has won it, I dislike the outcome because it appears this election did not live up to the standards we demand. If there were no question marks over the conduct of this election then I wouldn't have a problem with the outcome.
Opposition would disappear overnight.