Tony Blair is today revealed to be the past Labour leader that the public would most like Ed Miliband’s successor to resemble.
An exclusive Ipsos MORI poll for the Evening Standard finds that even Labour supporters are more likely to name Mr Blair than any other past Labour leader as the best role model.
By contrast, none of the four candidates competing to be crowned leader in September - Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn - appear to have yet won a big lead among either the public or Labour supporters.
Mr Corbyn, Mr Blair’s sternest critic in the contest, is trailing last.
Why a Tube strike counts as 'news' is beyond me. It's like having an article reporting that "the sun has risen this morning, with experts confidently predicting it will set again by the end of today".
Party support is broadly the same as at the general election, with the Conservatives on 39 per cent, Labour on 30, Liberal Democrats on nine, Ukip on eight and the Greens on six.
This website should ban posts on UK polls until the BPC report. It just invites mockery of the company involved.
Tony Blair is today revealed to be the past Labour leader that the public would most like Ed Miliband’s successor to resemble.
An exclusive Ipsos MORI poll for the Evening Standard finds that even Labour supporters are more likely to name Mr Blair than any other past Labour leader as the best role model.
By contrast, none of the four candidates competing to be crowned leader in September - Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn - appear to have yet won a big lead among either the public or Labour supporters.
Mr Corbyn, Mr Blair’s sternest critic in the contest, is trailing last.
Nick Robinson not impressed by the Labour leadership debate, either:
"MISSING: A BIG IDEA. LOST BY LABOUR PARTY. IF FOUND PLEASE INFORM PARTY BEFORE SEPTEMBER. REWARD - POWER (MAYBE)" Something was very obviously missing from last night's TV debate between the candidates for Labour leader. It was an election-winning 'Big Idea'. By this I don't mean a headline-grabbing policy initiative, such as cutting tuition fees or introducing a 'Mansion Tax' to pay for increased health spending. The party just tried that and failed - spectacularly. I mean an over-arching critique of what's wrong with Britain and how Labour might put it right and of what's wrong with the party and how the next leader might fix it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33180821
It's really too early for a Big idea... If time for navel gazing had been provided before the election began it might have been possible for candidates to come up with some.
Instead the election was announced so quickly that the candidates are those still standing from the previous Labour Government, the first Blairite on TV post election and the token leftie...
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
People who use terms like "hideously white" would probably not consider themselves to be prejudiced in any way; indeed, they'd think of themselves as being more enlightened than the majority.
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
I would say the number in the latter group is likely 1%.
If racism weren't a problem, we'd have difficulty justifying our race relations legislation (don't be fooled; 90% of the Equality Act covering race re-enacted the older legislation) but its repeal would be an unmitigated disaster.
I am pleased with the progress, but we aren't finished yet.
I don't think that's right on the 1%. A sizeable chunk of the British public think Nigel Farage is racist, when he has never uttered an explicitly racist sentiment. The meaning of the term today isn't as clear as you think it is.
Like you, I suspect, I long for a day when race is totally irrelevant. But I do dislike all the ancillary politics that's latched onto that objective, as Sean Fear deftly points out below.
Tony Blair is today revealed to be the past Labour leader that the public would most like Ed Miliband’s successor to resemble.
An exclusive Ipsos MORI poll for the Evening Standard finds that even Labour supporters are more likely to name Mr Blair than any other past Labour leader as the best role model.
By contrast, none of the four candidates competing to be crowned leader in September - Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn - appear to have yet won a big lead among either the public or Labour supporters.
Mr Corbyn, Mr Blair’s sternest critic in the contest, is trailing last.
My old gran used to look at me when I was a skinny kid of about 11 and say "Theres not enough meat on you to make a decent broth" I think she would have the same opinion about the four Labour pretenders..
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
People who use terms like "hideously white" would probably not consider themselves to be prejudiced in any way; indeed, they'd think of themselves as being more enlightened than the majority.
"Could the EU fall apart completely?" Some people accuse the BBC of being a cheerleader for the EU, but I don't think that this article by Mark Mardell would annoy many Eurosceptics.
QUOTE The strains that threaten to tear the EU apart can be summed up by the three nations that stand for different facets of the challenge - Greece, the UK and Ukraine.
The Euro project put the political cart firmly ahead of the horse, trundling along, dragging a few rather fine stallions, harnessed to assorted cart horses and the occasional donkey behind it. Maintaining a steady pace appears impossible, uncoupling the ill-suited nags unpalatable, for while the EU is not the same as the Euro, the single currency is an expression of its pride, ambition, and aspirations. If countries start talking about flaking off, it makes the whole business look, well, flaky. EUfrag, indeed. Then there is the UK. If the UK goes, it would blow a hole in the EU, undermining its credibility around the world. Behind the need for renegotiation is the public mood. Once thought of as a British eccentricity, Euroscepticism is now a force across the continent. END-QUOTE
My old gran used to look at me when I was a skinny kid of about 11 and say "Theres not enough meat on you to make a decent broth" I think she would have the same opinion about the four Labour pretenders..
It's revealing how many exponents of PC identity politics have been parroting arguments about Dolezal that they would dismiss as transphobia if applied to gender.
Not too impressed with the BBC’s inability to count last night. On Newsnight Laura Kuensberg stated several times – repeated later by Evan Davis – that the candidates had 4 months left to convince party members when the new Leader is to be revealed on September 12th - which is less than 3 months away!
I think too much emphasis is being placed on what these woud-be leaders would have to offer at the next election when the key factor is likely to be how the incumbent Government has performed in the intervening period. If the economy goes ‘tits up’ any of the three main contenders would be well placed to win – or at least get the Tories out of office. Had any of them been leader in May 2015 I suspect Labour would have managed 250 seats with the Tories on circa 310 – a very Hung Parliament with the LibDems too weak – and almost certainly disinclined – to prop the Tories up.
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
People who use terms like "hideously white" would probably not consider themselves to be prejudiced in any way; indeed, they'd think of themselves as being more enlightened than the majority.
Oh I quite agree. It's intellectual (and often actual) snobbery and values signalling at work.
"Could the EU fall apart completely?" Some people accuse the BBC of being a cheerleader for the EU, but I don't think that this article by Mark Mardell would annoy many Eurosceptics.
QUOTE The strains that threaten to tear the EU apart can be summed up by the three nations that stand for different facets of the challenge - Greece, the UK and Ukraine.
The Euro project put the political cart firmly ahead of the horse, trundling along, dragging a few rather fine stallions, harnessed to assorted cart horses and the occasional donkey behind it. Maintaining a steady pace appears impossible, uncoupling the ill-suited nags unpalatable, for while the EU is not the same as the Euro, the single currency is an expression of its pride, ambition, and aspirations. If countries start talking about flaking off, it makes the whole business look, well, flaky. EUfrag, indeed. Then there is the UK. If the UK goes, it would blow a hole in the EU, undermining its credibility around the world. Behind the need for renegotiation is the public mood. Once thought of as a British eccentricity, Euroscepticism is now a force across the continent. END-QUOTE
I'm not sure aided mass-migration across the med is going to win the EU many laurels either.
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
People who use terms like "hideously white" would probably not consider themselves to be prejudiced in any way; indeed, they'd think of themselves as being more enlightened than the majority.
Have they the "Rachel Dolezal" syndrome?
When you read about Rachel Dolezal, you realise that there really are people like Ali G.
If the Labour Party actually believes that one of these four would make a leader and possible PM..then the party is in even deeper trouble than I thought..seriously in deep poo.
I may be wrong, but I sense that active discrimation based on skin colour and 'genetics' is dying out. The central crusade against such prejudice (literally, prejudging according to physical appearance) that was front and centre stage from c.1960 to c.1995 has now morphed into a proxy for culture wars.
Given culture is about values, ethics and attitudes, it makes it a real area of moral hazard.
Racism is still a problem. Down but not out - the low hanging fruit have gone, the drive for the line ever more difficult.
Where, and in what way, do you sense racism is a problem in the UK?
The only places that it leaps to mind as being so are in the very elderly, some football terraces and the more sectarian parts of our cities, esp. Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast.
An obvious starting point is to ask people themselves.
16% of people say they hold some views which are racist. 27% say they are at least a little prejudiced against people from other races. And, of course, those that do not self-identify would have to be added.
Fair enough. About 15-20% seems about right. I'd say that's quite encouraging. Worth noting only 1% say 'very predjudiced'.
The flipside of those stats is that some respondees may be interpreting the word 'racism' more broadly, in the same way that people like Greg Dyke and Emma Thompson do.
People who use terms like "hideously white" would probably not consider themselves to be prejudiced in any way; indeed, they'd think of themselves as being more enlightened than the majority.
Have they the "Rachel Dolezal" syndrome?
When you read about Rachel Dolezal, you realise that there really are people like Ali G.
Mr. 1000, interesting stuff on part 375 of the Greek tragedy. I wonder if the EU's well-prepared for the political shock of 'ever closer union' going into reverse.
It's funny.
Best outcome for Greek people: organised Grexit with the support of the IMF and sensible economic policies.
But I think SYRIZA has taken that option off the table. Leaving the Eurozone, while the IMF continues to hound you for unpaid debts (cutting off your access to the financial markets), and with your currency in free fall, is not an attractive option.
IMF Messenger: Choose your next words carefully, Mr Tsipras. They may be your last as Greek PM.
Alexis Tsipras: [to himself: thinking] "Earth and water"? [Tsipras unsheathes and points his sword at the IMF Messenger's throat]
IMF Messenger: Madman! You're a madman!
Alexis Tsipras: Earth and water? You'll find plenty of both down there.
IMF Messenger: No man, German or Greek, no man threatens a messenger!
Alexis Tsipras: You bring the ashes and ruins of conquered economies to Athens' city steps. You insult my wife. You threaten my people with slavery and death! Oh, I've chosen my words carefully, Bankster. Perhaps you should have done the same!
IMF Messenger: This is blasphemy! This is madness!
Alexis Tsipras: Madness...? This is SYRIZA! [Tsipras kicks the IMF messenger down the well]
@VickiYoung01: Report into refurb of Palace of Westminster says it could take 32 years and cost almost £6bn if they don't move out http://t.co/jCB5GDyk9U
What odds on Labour coming third (behind UKIP, presumably) next time? Hard to see anyone but UKIP getting a referendum bounce.
You've said that b4. There aren't enough racists to get UKIP into second place.
What a stupid comment!
So, nobody other than a racist would ever vote UKIP? What about all the people from ethnic minorities who not only vote UKIP but stand as UKIP candidates for election?
I am afraid Squareroot has a history of such arrogant stupidity when it comes to UKIP. Thankfully he is in a minority amongst Tory (and Labour) posters on here who - with a few notable exceptions - are generally are rather more intelligent.
So quick to take the bait. Of course if you read it properly it doesn't say that all Kippers are racists, but then again a hell of a lot of KIppers are racists, just Google UKIP and racist ands see what you get.. there is a history of racist candidates having to stand down either because they've been caught out or standing down because of racism in the party,
but as I say, not enough of them to get UKIP into second place..
To be fair to UKIP, it speaks well of them that they take racism in their party so seriously to make sure they promptly kick out entryists from the BNP. Not all parties do that: Labour have former BNP members standing them, for example.
UKIP, because of their perceived policies, have a bigger problem with it than the other parties. The response of kicking out any extreme right wingers only kicks in when they get publicity.
Untrue.
UKIP are the only party that have a rule in place that states that any former members of the BNP are barred from joining. All the other parties are apparently happy to have former BNP members in their ranks. And yes former BNP members are regularly denied entry to the party or, if uncovered, kicked out.
What odds on Labour coming third (behind UKIP, presumably) next time? Hard to see anyone but UKIP getting a referendum bounce.
You've said that b4. There aren't enough racists to get UKIP into second place.
What a stupid comment!
So, nobody other than a racist would ever vote UKIP? What about all the people from ethnic minorities who not only vote UKIP but stand as UKIP candidates for election?
I am afraid Squareroot has a history of such arrogant stupidity when it comes to UKIP. Thankfully he is in a minority amongst Tory (and Labour) posters on here who - with a few notable exceptions - are generally are rather more intelligent.
So quick to take the bait. Of course if you read it properly it doesn't say that all Kippers are racists, but then again a hell of a lot of KIppers are racists, just Google UKIP and racist ands see what you get.. there is a history of racist candidates having to stand down either because they've been caught out or standing down because of racism in the party,
but as I say, not enough of them to get UKIP into second place..
Another fatuous and moronic comment.
Just Google Tory and racist and see what you get. It is just as meaningless a measure whichever party you pop into your search.
It's rather early in the process, but here's my prediction:
Yvette Cooper will finish last.
I'm seeing passion for Burnham, Kendall, and of course Corbyn. For Cooper, next to nothing. Kendall performed poorly at the hustings but has firm support from influential thinkers. Burnham is the continuity candidate. It's not clear what Cooper offers other than 'first woman leader'. I don't think that's enough.
What odds on Labour coming third (behind UKIP, presumably) next time? Hard to see anyone but UKIP getting a referendum bounce.
You've said that b4. There aren't enough racists to get UKIP into second place.
What a stupid comment!
So, nobody other than a racist would ever vote UKIP? What about all the people from ethnic minorities who not only vote UKIP but stand as UKIP candidates for election?
I am afraid Squareroot has a history of such arrogant stupidity when it comes to UKIP. Thankfully he is in a minority amongst Tory (and Labour) posters on here who - with a few notable exceptions - are generally are rather more intelligent.
So quick to take the bait. Of course if you read it properly it doesn't say that all Kippers are racists, but then again a hell of a lot of KIppers are racists, just Google UKIP and racist ands see what you get.. there is a history of racist candidates having to stand down either because they've been caught out or standing down because of racism in the party,
but as I say, not enough of them to get UKIP into second place..
To be fair to UKIP, it speaks well of them that they take racism in their party so seriously to make sure they promptly kick out entryists from the BNP. Not all parties do that: Labour have former BNP members standing them, for example.
UKIP, because of their perceived policies, have a bigger problem with it than the other parties. The response of kicking out any extreme right wingers only kicks in when they get publicity.
UKIP are the only party that have a rule in place that states that any former members of the BNP are barred from joining. All the other parties are apparently happy to have former BNP members in their ranks.
Why are UKIP the only party that found it necessary to make such a move? I'd suggest that aspects of their policy platform are rather attractive to ex-BNP members.
It's rather early in the process, but here's my prediction:
Yvette Cooper will finish last.
I'm seeing passion for Burnham, Kendall, and of course Corbyn. For Cooper, next to nothing. Kendall performed poorly at the hustings but has firm support from influential thinkers. Burnham is the continuity candidate. It's not clear what Cooper offers other than 'first woman leader'. I don't think that's enough.
Corbyn is still overpriced.
So you think that the candidate that Henry says is going to win will come last? Brave, very brave.
It's rather early in the process, but here's my prediction:
Yvette Cooper will finish last.
I'm seeing passion for Burnham, Kendall, and of course Corbyn. For Cooper, next to nothing. Kendall performed poorly at the hustings but has firm support from influential thinkers. Burnham is the continuity candidate. It's not clear what Cooper offers other than 'first woman leader'. I don't think that's enough.
Corbyn is still overpriced.
You don't need passion to win under AV. You just need to be the less unpopular of the two who are left standing after eliminations and transfers. (TSE can run a thread to explain...)
I did not know that. But anyway, why let the truth get in the way of a good quote
A bit like 'Crisis,what crisis?'
Callaghan's exact words were:
"Well, that's a judgment that you are making. I promise you that if you look at it from outside, and perhaps you're taking rather a parochial view at the moment, I don't think that other people in the world would share the view that there is mounting chaos."
Tony Blair is today revealed to be the past Labour leader that the public would most like Ed Miliband’s successor to resemble.
An exclusive Ipsos MORI poll for the Evening Standard finds that even Labour supporters are more likely to name Mr Blair than any other past Labour leader as the best role model.
By contrast, none of the four candidates competing to be crowned leader in September - Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn - appear to have yet won a big lead among either the public or Labour supporters.
Mr Corbyn, Mr Blair’s sternest critic in the contest, is trailing last.
You don't need passion to win under AV. You just need to be the less unpopular of the two who are left standing after eliminations and transfers. (TSE can run a thread to explain...)
All those 2nd and 3rd prefs are no use if you received the least 1st prefs out of all 4 candidates.
Why are UKIP the only party that found it necessary to make such a move? I'd suggest that aspects of their policy platform are rather attractive to ex-BNP members.
A more realistic view might be that anyone who talks about immigration and the EU is going to be labelled racist in today's ludicrous climate. As such the party is sensible to make sure those with real racist agendas are not able to tarnish their image.
Of course then we have those Tories like 'Bond_James_Bond' on here who are happy to vote for racist parties if it serves their ends
What odds on Labour coming third (behind UKIP, presumably) next time? Hard to see anyone but UKIP getting a referendum bounce.
You've said that b4. There aren't enough racists to get UKIP into second place.
What a stupid comment!
So, nobody other than a racist would ever vote UKIP? What about all the people from ethnic minorities who not only vote UKIP but stand as UKIP candidates for election?
I am afraid Squareroot has a history of such arrogant stupidity when it comes to UKIP. Thankfully he is in a minority amongst Tory (and Labour) posters on here who - with a few notable exceptions - are generally are rather more intelligent.
So quick to take the bait. Of course if you read it properly it doesn't say that all Kippers are racists, but then again a hell of a lot of KIppers are racists, just Google UKIP and racist ands see what you get.. there is a history of racist candidates having to stand down either because they've been caught out or standing down because of racism in the party,
but as I say, not enough of them to get UKIP into second place..
To be fair to UKIP, it speaks well of them that they take racism in their party so seriously to make sure they promptly kick out entryists from the BNP. Not all parties do that: Labour have former BNP members standing them, for example.
UKIP, because of their perceived policies, have a bigger problem with it than the other parties. The response of kicking out any extreme right wingers only kicks in when they get publicity.
Racists come from all over the political spectrum. Do you have examples of UKIP not kicking out racists when it has been a low publicity affair?
Er, if they didn't get any publicity how would I know about it? Do you have an example of UKIP kicking out anybody before they were 'outed' by Twitter or similar?
UKIP afaik is the only party to have a rule that bans former members of the BNP. Obviously it can only do so once the matter is brought to its attention, but if it's there in the rulebook I can't see how it can be called a knee-jerk response to bad publicity.
What odds on Labour coming third (behind UKIP, presumably) next time? Hard to see anyone but UKIP getting a referendum bounce.
You've said that b4. There aren't enough racists to get UKIP into second place.
What a stupid comment!
So, nobody other than a racist would ever vote UKIP? What about all the people from ethnic minorities who not only vote UKIP but stand as UKIP candidates for election?
I am afraid Squareroot has a history of such arrogant stupidity when it comes to UKIP. Thankfully he is in a minority amongst Tory (and Labour) posters on here who - with a few notable exceptions - are generally are rather more intelligent.
So quick to take the bait. Of course if you read it properly it doesn't say that all Kippers are racists, but then again a hell of a lot of KIppers are racists, just Google UKIP and racist ands see what you get.. there is a history of racist candidates having to stand down either because they've been caught out or standing down because of racism in the party,
but as I say, not enough of them to get UKIP into second place..
To be fair to UKIP, it speaks well of them that they take racism in their party so seriously to make sure they promptly kick out entryists from the BNP. Not all parties do that: Labour have former BNP members standing them, for example.
UKIP, because of their perceived policies, have a bigger problem with it than the other parties. The response of kicking out any extreme right wingers only kicks in when they get publicity.
UKIP are the only party that have a rule in place that states that any former members of the BNP are barred from joining. All the other parties are apparently happy to have former BNP members in their ranks.
Why are UKIP the only party that found it necessary to make such a move? I'd suggest that aspects of their policy platform are rather attractive to ex-BNP members.
Because they're more conscientious on these matters than the other parties are? I'm not a UKIP supporter, and think many of their ideas are very foolish, but some people seem desperate to interpret everything they do - even the good things - as being negative.
Comments
An exclusive Ipsos MORI poll for the Evening Standard finds that even Labour supporters are more likely to name Mr Blair than any other past Labour leader as the best role model.
By contrast, none of the four candidates competing to be crowned leader in September - Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Liz Kendall and Jeremy Corbyn - appear to have yet won a big lead among either the public or Labour supporters.
Mr Corbyn, Mr Blair’s sternest critic in the contest, is trailing last.
http://bit.ly/1HWNSaa
EDIT: John Smith, the greatest PM the Labour Party never had.
Instead the election was announced so quickly that the candidates are those still standing from the previous Labour Government, the first Blairite on TV post election and the token leftie...
Like you, I suspect, I long for a day when race is totally irrelevant. But I do dislike all the ancillary politics that's latched onto that objective, as Sean Fear deftly points out below.
"Could the EU fall apart completely?"
Some people accuse the BBC of being a cheerleader for the EU, but I don't think that this article by Mark Mardell would annoy many Eurosceptics.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-33162306
QUOTE
The strains that threaten to tear the EU apart can be summed up by the three nations that stand for different facets of the challenge - Greece, the UK and Ukraine.
The Euro project put the political cart firmly ahead of the horse, trundling along, dragging a few rather fine stallions, harnessed to assorted cart horses and the occasional donkey behind it.
Maintaining a steady pace appears impossible, uncoupling the ill-suited nags unpalatable, for while the EU is not the same as the Euro, the single currency is an expression of its pride, ambition, and aspirations.
If countries start talking about flaking off, it makes the whole business look, well, flaky. EUfrag, indeed.
Then there is the UK.
If the UK goes, it would blow a hole in the EU, undermining its credibility around the world.
Behind the need for renegotiation is the public mood.
Once thought of as a British eccentricity, Euroscepticism is now a force across the continent.
END-QUOTE
I think too much emphasis is being placed on what these woud-be leaders would have to offer at the next election when the key factor is likely to be how the incumbent Government has performed in the intervening period. If the economy goes ‘tits up’ any of the three main contenders would be well placed to win – or at least get the Tories out of office. Had any of them been leader in May 2015 I suspect Labour would have managed 250 seats with the Tories on circa 310 – a very Hung Parliament with the LibDems too weak – and almost certainly disinclined – to prop the Tories up.
Or not. Either way, there are a lot of events (dear boy) between now and May 2020.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/rachel-dolezal-called-exodus-boycott-803199
Alexis Tsipras: [to himself: thinking] "Earth and water"?
[Tsipras unsheathes and points his sword at the IMF Messenger's throat]
IMF Messenger: Madman! You're a madman!
Alexis Tsipras: Earth and water? You'll find plenty of both down there.
IMF Messenger: No man, German or Greek, no man threatens a messenger!
Alexis Tsipras: You bring the ashes and ruins of conquered economies to Athens' city steps. You insult my wife. You threaten my people with slavery and death! Oh, I've chosen my words carefully, Bankster. Perhaps you should have done the same!
IMF Messenger: This is blasphemy! This is madness!
Alexis Tsipras: Madness...? This is SYRIZA!
[Tsipras kicks the IMF messenger down the well]
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Harold_Macmillan#Disputed
Blair ain't as tarnished as many think. 23% of Lab supporters (19% of public) want next leader to resemble TB, next highest 8% JohnSmith.
It's almost as if Dan Hodges has always been right.
I thought that was an absolute given.....It will be this country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgiWumiXKwk
Tom Watson = Marshall Ney
UKIP are the only party that have a rule in place that states that any former members of the BNP are barred from joining. All the other parties are apparently happy to have former BNP members in their ranks. And yes former BNP members are regularly denied entry to the party or, if uncovered, kicked out.
Just Google Tory and racist and see what you get. It is just as meaningless a measure whichever party you pop into your search.
Yvette Cooper will finish last.
I'm seeing passion for Burnham, Kendall, and of course Corbyn. For Cooper, next to nothing. Kendall performed poorly at the hustings but has firm support from influential thinkers. Burnham is the continuity candidate. It's not clear what Cooper offers other than 'first woman leader'. I don't think that's enough.
Corbyn is still overpriced.
"Well, that's a judgment that you are making. I promise you that if you look at it from outside, and perhaps you're taking rather a parochial view at the moment, I don't think that other people in the world would share the view that there is mounting chaos."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent#.27Crisis.3F_What_crisis.3F.27
Of course then we have those Tories like 'Bond_James_Bond' on here who are happy to vote for racist parties if it serves their ends
Aren't you thinking of Grouchy? (Later to star of course in the hit Disney movie "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs")