Britain's most high-profile children's charity chief was facing fresh pressure last night over an unpaid £700,000 tax bill which was mysteriously waived by the then Chancellor Gordon Brown.
The "centre ground" has moved miles to the right by comparison with a generation ago. Labour's activists have not. This is largely due to globalisation, and the defeat of the Soviet "empire": it was always intended by the globalisers that their agenda would include the destruction of welfare capitalism, social democracy or whatever you want to call it. It is also the case that elections are increasingly fought over identity politics rather than economics, and Labour can never cope with this as its heart believes in universal brotherhood and the voters don't and aren't going to anytime soon.
I am beginning to hope that Labour does elect Corbyn so that the Blairites all quit the Party.
Yet polls show most voters want to renationalise the railways and public utilities, want a 50% top tax rate and oppose the public sector pay freeze, they are not as rightleaning as you make out. Most voters are not socialist by any means, but they are certainly not laissez-faire libertarians either!
The "centre ground" has moved miles to the right by comparison with a generation ago. Labour's activists have not. This is largely due to globalisation, and the defeat of the Soviet "empire": it was always intended by the globalisers that their agenda would include the destruction of welfare capitalism, social democracy or whatever you want to call it. It is also the case that elections are increasingly fought over identity politics rather than economics, and Labour can never cope with this as its heart believes in universal brotherhood and the voters don't and aren't going to anytime soon.
I am beginning to hope that Labour does elect Corbyn so that the Blairites all quit the Party.
Yet polls show most voters want to renationalise the railways and public utilities, want a 50% top tax rate and oppose the public sector pay freeze, they are not as rightleaning as you make out. Most voters are not socialist by any means, but they are certainly not laissez-faire libertarians either!
Indeed - I imagine it a source of endless frustration to ideologues on both sides that the public can be so bloody inconsistent, and even contradictory!
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
So the Finns haven't shut the door yet, and Italy is saying Greece cannot be allowed to leave the Euro - which undermines any of the parties who think, reasonably or not, that Greece needs to offer more, as the Greeks will think correctly Italy won't vote to kick them out under any circumstances - so it's back to Germany and a few allies being the only ones who can get the voting percentage for a deal to be too low by opposing it.
Will the Germans really do that if they cannot get another 'big' Euro nation on side? They don't like being isolated I imagine.
The Germans need not pull the lever, nor the Finns, Baltics or Slovaks. Simply not progressing the talks means that the Greeks pull the lever themselves. Greeks cannot keep the banks closed much longer.
Harriet Harman has issued a humiliating rebuke to Labour leadership favourite Andy Burnham amid claims he is ‘tacking Left’ to stop veteran Jeremy Corbyn from winning the contest.
In an extraordinary put-down, acting party boss Ms Harman told Mr Burnham that Labour had ‘lost’ the debate on capping benefit pay-outs, before adding: ‘You may have noticed that we lost the Election.’ The withering remarks came in a behind-closed-doors meeting of Labour’s Shadow Cabinet last week ahead of George Osborne’s Budget statement.
You fail to mention Burnham was also booed at a union meeting after failing to commit to oppose the £23,000 welfare cap, he simply said the £20,000 cap outside London was not in the Tory manifesto
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yet polls show most voters want to renationalise the railways and public utilities, want a 50% top tax rate and oppose the public sector pay freeze, they are not as rightleaning as you make out. Most voters are not socialist by any means, but they are certainly not laissez-faire libertarians either!
Those questions are hardly ever phrased in the way that they are at election time. For example,
Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to renationalise the railways? Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to protect public sector workers pensions?
The "centre ground" has moved miles to the right by comparison with a generation ago. Labour's activists have not. This is largely due to globalisation, and the defeat of the Soviet "empire": it was always intended by the globalisers that their agenda would include the destruction of welfare capitalism, social democracy or whatever you want to call it. It is also the case that elections are increasingly fought over identity politics rather than economics, and Labour can never cope with this as its heart believes in universal brotherhood and the voters don't and aren't going to anytime soon.
I am beginning to hope that Labour does elect Corbyn so that the Blairites all quit the Party.
Yet polls show most voters want to renationalise the railways and public utilities, want a 50% top tax rate and oppose the public sector pay freeze, they are not as rightleaning as you make out. Most voters are not socialist by any means, but they are certainly not laissez-faire libertarians either!
Indeed - I imagine it a source of endless frustration to ideologues on both sides that the public can be so bloody inconsistent, and even contradictory!
Indeed, the public wants generally less welfare and cuts to overseas aid, less immigration, tougher sentences for prisoners, more powers back from the EU, lower inheritance tax and cuts to income tax for middle and low income earners and backs airstrikes on ISIS. They also want higher taxes on the rich, renationalised railways and utilities, oppose the public sector pay freeze and the ending of the maintenance grant, oppose free schools and private sector involvement in the NHS (though they show more support for grammars), back gay marriage and think the war in Iraq was a mistake.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
But, some of them are floating voters. To say that you won't even make your case to them is stupid.
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
I agree with OGH that Burnham's Sun statement make him unelectable as a PM. Add in the loony leftie Corbyn and we have two liabilities for the party. They may probably be the final two contenders in the vote.
Vote for Leftie or Loony Leftie. Dumb or Dumber.
Why, the Sun now has a far more Tory/UKIP readership relative to the nation as a whole than it did in 1997, 47% of Sun readers voted Tory in 2015, 19% UKIP, well above the nation as a whole. In 1997 30% of Sun readers voted Tory, the same as the nation as whole. I agree on Corbyn, but Burnham continues to have the highest net favourables of the contendors with the public
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
Britain's most high-profile children's charity chief was facing fresh pressure last night over an unpaid £700,000 tax bill which was mysteriously waived by the then Chancellor Gordon Brown.
The Labour people have multiple routes to power. One is through the Lib Dems and 2015 LD -> C, LD -> GPEW, Lab -> GPEW switchers. Probably the Lib Dems will recover some of their strength, but maybe they won't and people will decide that eight seats is not enough to be considered a continuing political force. That route has nothing to do with The Sun (gross circulation now sub 2m). Perhaps it's anathema to say it but the UK may just happen to be like every other European country in which the white working classes become permanently more politically divided, and therefore it's not vital to pander to outsider middle-class perceptions of their interests.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
But, some of them are floating voters. To say that you won't even make your case to them is stupid.
True, but floating voters also read the Times, the Mail, the Independent, the Star, the FT etc they do not just read the Sun. Floating voters determine elections, not the Sun
Mr. Foxinsox, no. Favourite, perhaps, but in a two horse race that's either someone with cunning inside knowledge making the difference, or the odds are wrong.
PSA: Good grief Labour, pull your heads out of your collective fundaments and start crafting some decent policies that will win you the market town/shire vote. That's not impossible.
Burnham's comments regarding the Sun are risible; hardly the mark of a statesman in the making. The fact that he's well placed to win make me despair.
With respect to the article; Mandelson is yesterday's man. I can't see how he could carry the party with him. I think that either Corbyn (don't laugh!) or Kendall would be far better for Labour than either Burnham or Cooper.
Corbyn, assuming that Labour don't necessarily want to be elected in 2020, would test the idea of a left wing Labour party to either success or destruction. It's probably worth the loss of five years of potential ministerial salaries to let that play out.
Kendall is the only moderately centrist candidate that can't be legitimately tagged as a Blairite/Brownite. She could defuse two festering issues that haunt the party - Iraq and the 2001-2010 financial management.
Well. Having just flicked thro the papers review on the DP, old Toilets Maguire is getting more left as he gets older... juxtaposing the Greek crisis with ghastly austerity.. with absolutely no understanding that if you spend more than you bring in, you will be in trouble. That's why Labour's economic credibility is lost. Miliband fecked his own party good and proper by his stupid comment about Labour not having overspent. We can only hope Corbyn wins. Labour will be fecked for at least 20 yrs if he is.
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
The Sun has simply recently backed the winner, the winner has not won because of the Sun
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
A few maybe, but clearly some of their former Labour readers have simply moved online, to other papers or stopped reading papers altogether. The swing to the Tories and UKIP since 1997 amongst Sun readers is significantly larger than the swing across the country as a whole
Yet polls show most voters want to renationalise the railways and public utilities, want a 50% top tax rate and oppose the public sector pay freeze, they are not as rightleaning as you make out. Most voters are not socialist by any means, but they are certainly not laissez-faire libertarians either!
Those questions are hardly ever phrased in the way that they are at election time. For example,
Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to renationalise the railways? Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to protect public sector workers pensions?
Do you support an active role for the independent sector working alongside the NHS in the provision of care, particularly where they bring innovation – such as in end-of-life care and cancer services, and increase capacity?
Would you support longer waiting lists in return for excluding independent health providers from carrying out the work, free at the point of use?
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
The Sun has simply recently backed the winner, the winner has not won because of the Sun
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
A few maybe, but clearly some of their former Labour readers have simply moved online, to other papers or stopped reading papers altogether. The swing to the Tories and UKIP since 1997 amongst Sun readers is significantly larger than the swing across the country as a whole
And given the passage of two decades, some grew up during the social solidarity of the last War and have left this world, while the Right to Buy ex-tenants have probably not departed the stage yet.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
WVM is now more rightleaning relatively, Labour does better amongst some elements of the surburban middle class relatively eg gaining Wirral West and Chester and Hove. Of course Labour needs to do better amongst WVM than Miliband but it does not need to win them outright, as they now are more Tory and more UKIP than the nation as a whole!
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.
Surely in 1950 a 22-year old graduate was much more likely than a 22-year old ex-apprentice to vote Conservative. Today, the gap has at least closed substantially, if not completely.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
WVM is now more rightleaning relatively, Labour does better amongst some elements of the surburban middle class relatively eg gaining Wirral West and Chester and Hove. Of course Labour needs to do better amongst WVM than Miliband but it does not need to win them outright, as they now are more Tory and more UKIP than the nation as a whole!
One thing I've always wondered is WVMs views on gay marriage. It seemed to be a key Tory policy, in order to demonstrate the party was more forward-thinking, more inclusive than in the past and an attempt simultaneously to promote social conservatives values regarding marriage. The stereotype of WVM would appear to indicate that perhaps that demographic wouldn't really be supportive of gay marriage.
The Labour people have multiple routes to power. One is through the Lib Dems and 2015 LD -> C, LD -> GPEW, Lab -> GPEW switchers. Probably the Lib Dems will recover some of their strength, but maybe they won't and people will decide that eight seats is not enough to be considered a continuing political force. That route has nothing to do with The Sun (gross circulation now sub 2m). Perhaps it's anathema to say it but the UK may just happen to be like every other European country in which the white working classes become permanently more politically divided, and therefore it's not vital to pander to outsider middle-class perceptions of their interests.
Indeed, Obama won twice despite losing the white working class, and the fact that many wwc voters now vote UKIP rather than Tory means the Tories cannot count on them either. That reflects the situation in France where the wwc are the biggest backers of FN and Marine Le Pen. Labour needs to do better amongst the wwc, but it would do better to focus on the voters who voted LD in 2010 then Tory in 2015, middle class voters who voted for Blair in 2005 then Cameron in 2010 and 2015 and voters who have switched from the LDs and Labour to the Greens
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.
Tbh unless Labour did a Kendall I don't see The Sun as being much interested in Labour anyway.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 4m4 minutes ago .@YvetteCooperMP to @JPonpolitics 'Most ppl in party know we're not going to win by turning the clock back...to a narrow party of the left'
Mr. Foxinsox, no. Favourite, perhaps, but in a two horse race that's either someone with cunning inside knowledge making the difference, or the odds are wrong.
The Electoral Reform Society is handling the ballot, so I would expect it to be secure.
@tnewtondunn: Yvette Cooper suggests Miliband will be in her Shad Cab. Tells @JPonpolitics; “Ed has done huge amount for the party and is very talented”.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
WVM is now more rightleaning relatively, Labour does better amongst some elements of the surburban middle class relatively eg gaining Wirral West and Chester and Hove. Of course Labour needs to do better amongst WVM than Miliband but it does not need to win them outright, as they now are more Tory and more UKIP than the nation as a whole!
One thing I've always wondered is WVMs views on gay marriage. It seemed to be a key Tory policy, in order to demonstrate the party was more forward-thinking, more inclusive in the past and attempt simultaneously to promote social conservatives values regarding marriage. The stereotype of WVM would appear to indicate that perhaps that demographic wouldn't really be supportive of gay marriage.
I would guess gay marriage is more an urbanisation and age divide than a class thing, just from looking at the Irish referendum evidence; maybe class is more important elsewhere. Regardless, there was huge public support in the UK. And the most numerous opponents, old people in rural areas, weren't numerous enough to threaten Conservatives in those safest seats. EDIT: And, erm, White Van Man is a gendered archetype and for every man there is a woman who is probably more supportive.
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
The Sun has simply recently backed the winner, the winner has not won because of the Sun
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
A few maybe, but clearly some of their former Labour readers have simply moved online, to other papers or stopped reading papers altogether. The swing to the Tories and UKIP since 1997 amongst Sun readers is significantly larger than the swing across the country as a whole
But that all assumes a uniform swing. The Sun reader tends to be a particular demographic. Has that demographic actually changed, or just how they vote changed?
Cliched Sun demographic. Proportionally male, proportionally younger, and fairly over represented in C1 C2 and D social classes.
These are the people who fell over themselves to vote for Blair, usually hard working, from poor pay to good pay, though the good pay usually comes from some damn hard grafting. They have little time for people with bad backs or depression who sit on benefits drinking special brew all day, and who often live on the same street (or did do).
You dont think that it is an issue that this demographic has swung so strongly against Labour? Could you see why Peter Mandelson might want to metaphorically stamp on your head?
Alan Johnson adding his fuel to the fire this morning:
“There was the issue of not defending our record in government, acting as if 13 years in government had been humiliating. You don’t expect the Conservative Party to say what good things we did in government, you do expect the Labour Party to do that. It was almost trying to distance ourselves from that.
“You can’t own the future without defending the past. Cameron’s job is to show that the Tories have changed and we’ve failed, and a lot of people helped him in that because we ducked out of awkward questions.
“These are simple things but if you just give up on them the opinion grows in people’s minds that we were a bad government for 13 years and therefore we’re not going to be elected again.”
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
The Sun has simply recently backed the winner, the winner has not won because of the Sun
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
A few maybe, but clearly some of their former Labour readers have simply moved online, to other papers or stopped reading papers altogether. The swing to the Tories and UKIP since 1997 amongst Sun readers is significantly larger than the swing across the country as a whole
But that all assumes a uniform swing. The Sun reader tends to be a particular demographic. Has that demographic actually changed, or just how they vote changed?
Cliched Sun demographic. Proportionally male, proportionally younger, and fairly over represented in C1 C2 and D social classes.
These are the people who fell over themselves to vote for Blair, usually hard working, from poor pay to good pay, though the good pay usually comes from some damn hard grafting. They have little time for people with bad backs or depression who sit on benefits drinking special brew all day, and who often live on the same street (or did do).
You dont think that it is an issue that this demographic has swung so strongly against Labour? Could you see why Peter Mandelson might want to metaphorically stamp on your head?
It is an issue yes and Labour does need to win back some of the wwc voters it has lost, however many of the wwc are voting UKIP so the Tories cannot count on them either. In my view the key swing demographic is actually middle class voters, aged about 30-60, living in the suburbs who voted for Blair in 2005, then Cameron in 2010 and 2015. They are who Labour really has to win back, not the wwc
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
Varoufakis did a hell of a lot to destroy trust in Greece as a euro partner, when the one topic that today unites Greeks most is that they should stay in the euro. This could make him one of the most incompetent politicians of the 21st century.
That is the problem with the individualistic-heroic model of politics. Getting things done has no role in it.
What's particularly stupid about Andy Burnham's vow not to treat with the Sun is that he already had unimpeachable credentials on Hillsborough. He's made himself look crazily ideological to the wider public for no significant advantage in the leadership election.
The number of people in the wider public who will know or care in 2020 whether Burnham gave an interview to the Sun in 2015 is minuscule (even among Sun readers). The Sun will be hostile, but so they would if he popped round and gave them doughnuts. At present, the selection is all about who Labour supporters like, and Burnham being nasty to the Sun is just like a Tory leadership candidate being tough on unions - good mood music. (That said, the idea downthread of a Hillsborough/Liverpool peace tour is a very good one for both sides.)
I agree with the lead piece - finding a good strategist is crucial. Ideally you want someone who isn't identified with any particular wing of the party, which makes Mandleson risky, though if the leader is seen as left-wing then it could well be a smart balancing move (just as Kendall as leader should appoint someone on the left).
The huge Islington North CLP has its nomination meeting on Wednesday - Corbyn will win as he's the local MP, but it'll be interesting as a guide to London Labour to see how the others do and what happens about the deputy race.
'It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.'
Or alternatively he's going to do so well and be so popular that he can just ignore the 30% of Sun readers that vote Labour and not even bother to try and convert their readers that vote for other parties.
Mr. Foxinsox, no. Favourite, perhaps, but in a two horse race that's either someone with cunning inside knowledge making the difference, or the odds are wrong.
The Electoral Reform Society is handling the ballot, so I would expect it to be secure.
What other inside knowledge is there?
Given the various comments here of those who have attended hustings or have voted for both candidates, it does look remarkable that in a two horse race one of the runners could be as short as 1/33. 1/3 I could understand, can it be just that the weight of money is all on Farron?
Mr. HYUFD, I'd caution against comparing voting demographics across different countries.
Caution, but not ignore. The trend is the wwc is more socially conservative than the average voter and more anti immigration and more economically populist and that holds across the western world. Focusing in on the wwc could turn off some suburban middle class voters who are more socially liberal and economically moderate. The mainstream centre left cannot now automatically count on wwc support and that applies as much in Bolton as in Ohio, Marseilles or Queensland, instead the centre left are more likely to win ethnic minorities and educated urbanites than the wwc. The left needs to win some wwc voters, but it can win a majority without having a large majority of the wwc behind it
Surely in 1950 a 22-year old graduate was much more likely than a 22-year old ex-apprentice to vote Conservative. Today, the gap has at least closed substantially, if not completely.
Indeed, culture, not class, is now the key determinant of voting patterns
PSA: Good grief Labour, pull your heads out of your collective fundaments and start crafting some decent policies that will win you the market town/shire vote. That's not impossible.
Burnham's comments regarding the Sun are risible; hardly the mark of a statesman in the making. The fact that he's well placed to win make me despair.
With respect to the article; Mandelson is yesterday's man. I can't see how he could carry the party with him. I think that either Corbyn (don't laugh!) or Kendall would be far better for Labour than either Burnham or Cooper.
Corbyn, assuming that Labour don't necessarily want to be elected in 2020, would test the idea of a left wing Labour party to either success or destruction. It's probably worth the loss of five years of potential ministerial salaries to let that play out.
Kendall is the only moderately centrist candidate that can't be legitimately tagged as a Blairite/Brownite. She could defuse two festering issues that haunt the party - Iraq and the 2001-2010 financial management.
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
Indeed, the Sun's influence is in decline, winning the support of The Metro could well become just as crucial as the Sun in future elections
The influence of the Sun newspaper is overrated, it now has a lower print circulation due to the internet and has less of a presence online than, say, the Mail and Guardian. Its readership is also now more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than in 1997 when it was closer to the nation as a whole.
In 1997 the nation voted 43% Labour, 30% Tory, 16% LD. Sun readers 52% Labour, 30% Tory, 12% LD
The Sun has simply recently backed the winner, the winner has not won because of the Sun
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
A few maybe, but clearly some of their former Labour readers have simply moved online, to other papers or stopped reading papers altogether. The swing to the Tories and UKIP since 1997 amongst Sun readers is significantly larger than the swing across the country as a whole
And given the passage of two decades, some grew up during the social solidarity of the last War and have left this world, while the Right to Buy ex-tenants have probably not departed the stage yet.
Maybe, but some of the Sun's Tory voters in 1997 will have passed away too
'It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.'
Or alternatively he's going to do so well and be so popular that he can just ignore the 30% of Sun readers that vote Labour and not even bother to try and convert their readers that vote for other parties.
Self righteous, arrogant or just an idiot ?
As I pointed out 24% of Sun readers voted Labour in 2015, that is 6% less than voted Labour in the UK as a whole, so Sun readers are more rightleaning than the average voter. It is the average voter Labour needs to win for a majority, not simply Sun readers
Mr. Foxinsox, were the envelopes sent out with a big picture of Farron on them?
The ballot paper came with a begging letter, and an election address from each candidate. Strictly neutral. I also got a seperate Farron mailing, but cannot recall one from Lamb.
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.
Tbh unless Labour did a Kendall I don't see The Sun as being much interested in Labour anyway.
Burnham is far more centrist than his image and could easily pull his party to the middle. If they lose Express readers, Mail readers and Sun readers, thats the white working class vote done for.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 4m4 minutes ago .@YvetteCooperMP to @JPonpolitics 'Most ppl in party know we're not going to win turning the clock back...to a narrow party of the left'
The Labour people have multiple routes to power. One is through the Lib Dems and 2015 LD -> C, LD -> GPEW, Lab -> GPEW switchers. Probably the Lib Dems will recover some of their strength, but maybe they won't and people will decide that eight seats is not enough to be considered a continuing political force. That route has nothing to do with The Sun (gross circulation now sub 2m). Perhaps it's anathema to say it but the UK may just happen to be like every other European country in which the white working classes become permanently more politically divided, and therefore it's not vital to pander to outsider middle-class perceptions of their interests.
Indeed, Obama won twice despite losing the white working class, and the fact that many wwc voters now vote UKIP rather than Tory means the Tories cannot count on them either. That reflects the situation in France where the wwc are the biggest backers of FN and Marine Le Pen. Labour needs to do better amongst the wwc, but it would do better to focus on the voters who voted LD in 2010 then Tory in 2015, middle class voters who voted for Blair in 2005 then Cameron in 2010 and 2015 and voters who have switched from the LDs and Labour to the Greens
The USA must be about a third ethnic minority. The UK is about 10%. The numbers just don't work here, despite Labour doing their best to stack them in her favour.
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.
Tbh unless Labour did a Kendall I don't see The Sun as being much interested in Labour anyway.
Burnham is far more centrist than his image and could easily pull his party to the middle. If they lose Express readers, Mail readers and Sun readers, thats the white working class vote done for.
I agree, Burnham is actually the second most centrist candidate after Kendall, Cooper and certainly Corbyn are more leftwing than him. He may not win wwc voters but he will do better than Ed Miliband did with them
The Labour people have multiple routes to power. One is through the Lib Dems and 2015 LD -> C, LD -> GPEW, Lab -> GPEW switchers. Probably the Lib Dems will recover some of their strength, but maybe they won't and people will decide that eight seats is not enough to be considered a continuing political force. That route has nothing to do with The Sun (gross circulation now sub 2m). Perhaps it's anathema to say it but the UK may just happen to be like every other European country in which the white working classes become permanently more politically divided, and therefore it's not vital to pander to outsider middle-class perceptions of their interests.
Indeed, Obama won twice despite losing the white working class, and the fact that many wwc voters now vote UKIP rather than Tory means the Tories cannot count on them either. That reflects the situation in France where the wwc are the biggest backers of FN and Marine Le Pen. Labour needs to do better amongst the wwc, but it would do better to focus on the voters who voted LD in 2010 then Tory in 2015, middle class voters who voted for Blair in 2005 then Cameron in 2010 and 2015 and voters who have switched from the LDs and Labour to the Greens
The USA must be about a third ethnic minority. The UK is about 10%. The numbers just don't work here, despite Labour doing their best to stack them in her favour.
Even Obama could not win with ethnic minority voters alone though. He won by winning suburban middle class voters, that is who Labour really needs to win back
Also from the BBC livefeed (warning, comes from Peston): "So the first rather chilling thing I've learned, from well-placed bankers, is there have been no conversations between the Bank of Greece, the government or regulators and Greece's commercial banks about the technicalities of leaving the euro and adopting a new currency."
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
Actually, Montgomerie fully understands why it is at is. What annoys me is the leftie twitter torrent of abuse at Osborne for "doubling the debt", when he was left with £150 billion deficit. It is extremely difficult to reign in public spending when it has got out of control The whole talk of 'austerity' is a bit of a myth. Theres nothing austere about spending 10% more than you earn.
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
There are a certain breed of right-wing journalists who would like to think that a 10% deficit could have been eliminated by now with no real effort and no adverse economic effects. They are as delusional as the Pollys on the other side in never having to deal with political reality.
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
Indeed, the Sun's influence is in decline, winning the support of The Metro could well become just as crucial as the Sun in future elections
A free newspaper?? Do you really think any free newspaper given away - pushed into your hands - can have any influence? Even the Standard? What kind of interest can people have in its opinion? Lets not forget as well that a free newspaper is desperate for the advertisisng - ie a successful economy - that gives it its profit.
'It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.'
Or alternatively he's going to do so well and be so popular that he can just ignore the 30% of Sun readers that vote Labour and not even bother to try and convert their readers that vote for other parties.
Self righteous, arrogant or just an idiot ?
As I pointed out 24% of Sun readers voted Labour in 2015, that is 6% less than voted Labour in the UK as a whole, so Sun readers are more rightleaning than the average voter. It is the average voter Labour needs to win for a majority, not simply Sun readers
As I pointed out, thats because Labour did such a damn good job of sneering off that demographic.
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
You know that his wife was the inspiration for Jarvis Cocker's Common People?
"She came from Greece, she had a thirst for knowledge; she studied sculpture at St. Martin's College"
I also agree with @HYUFD. It often appears to be implied that The Sun was somehow crucial in Ed Miliband not winning the GE, but his approval ratings were shite and Labour had lost the economic argument a long time prior to the Sun's decision to back the Tories in 2015. For your average voter, I suspect that how leaders and parties come across on TV, is far more of an important factor than what The Sun may or may not say. Furthermore, as newspaper circulation continues to decline, so will any influence The Sun may or may not have had. The Sun is currently behind a paywall, and when consumers can get their news from a variety of other newspaper websites for free, why on earth are they are going to fork out for The Sun? It's hardly offering anything unique.
Indeed, the Sun's influence is in decline, winning the support of The Metro could well become just as crucial as the Sun in future elections
A free newspaper?? Do you really think any free newspaper given away - pushed into your hands - can have any influence? Even the Standard? What kind of interest can people have in its opinion? Lets not forget as well that a free newspaper is desperate for the advertisisng - ie a successful economy - that gives it its profit.
Given the Metro is now given away free to commuters in most major cities many now read that not the Sun and given the Sun now costs about 40p that hardly suggests its readers have much invested in its opinions.
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
You are fond of quoting thickos today. What a dope you are. Ultra Socialist patriots eh - ethnic hating ultra socialist patriots. Sieg heil to you too.
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
'It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.'
Or alternatively he's going to do so well and be so popular that he can just ignore the 30% of Sun readers that vote Labour and not even bother to try and convert their readers that vote for other parties.
Self righteous, arrogant or just an idiot ?
As I pointed out 24% of Sun readers voted Labour in 2015, that is 6% less than voted Labour in the UK as a whole, so Sun readers are more rightleaning than the average voter. It is the average voter Labour needs to win for a majority, not simply Sun readers
As I pointed out, thats because Labour did such a damn good job of sneering off that demographic.
Yet while Labour needs to win back some Sun readers it also suggests Labour could win an overall majority even if it comes behind the Tories amongst Sun readers. For example based on Labour increasing its vote on UNS by 7% in 2020 it would win 37% across the UK but only 31% amongst Sun readers
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
You are fond of quoting thickos today. What a dope you are. Ultra Socialist patriots eh - ethnic hating ultra socialist patriots. Sieg heil to you too.
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
You know that his wife was the inspiration for Jarvis Cocker's Common People?
"She came from Greece, she had a thirst for knowledge; she studied sculpture at St. Martin's College"
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
There are a certain breed of right-wing journalists who would like to think that a 10% deficit could have been eliminated by now with no real effort and no adverse economic effects. They are as delusional as the Pollys on the other side in never having to deal with political reality.
Completely agree. They fail to understand the insidious nature of the problem. By 2010 all of the "super taxes" of the City boom were gone and the full horror of the underlying reality was on show. We had a State that our productive economy would have had to have been at least 30% bigger to sustain.
Removing that excess spending at once would have caused economic collapse and mass unemployment similar to what has happened to Greece. In an ideal world external demand could have replaced the borrowed spending but the EZ has struggled to even maintain its level of demand for UK goods and services and much of the rest of the world has not been much better.
Furthermore, the last government had left a series of booby traps which made deficit reduction even more difficult. The WTC system meant that falling unemployment actually meant an increase in benefit spending rather than the reverse. The expenditure on off balance sheet debt for much of the new buildings and schools was destined to rocket. The frightening cost of public sector final salary schemes was completely unaddressed. The publicly funded growth of third sector "charities" meant there was an enormously loud and supposedly impartial opposition to every cut, however modest.
Anyone who pretends that the hard work of both the last government and the current government has failed to address at least some of these problems is frankly a superficial idiot. Anyone who thinks that the deficit has not been further reduced simply because of some moral weakness or lack of will is so ignorant of the challenge as to be not worth listening to or reading. Regrettably Halligan and Montgomerie ever more frequently fall into these categories.
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
There are a certain breed of right-wing journalists who would like to think that a 10% deficit could have been eliminated by now with no real effort and no adverse economic effects. They are as delusional as the Pollys on the other side in never having to deal with political reality.
Absolutely. I think there was fair criticism of Osborne in 2011/13 because the government talked about austerity and cuts, but public spending was going up everywhere. There was no real cuts anywhere. Things are different now. Osborne has put in place real departmental reductions, together with gdp growth we should see the State reducing to the 2001 percent of GDP.
You never start a government from where you want to be, you are where you are.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
WVM is now more rightleaning relatively, Labour does better amongst some elements of the surburban middle class relatively eg gaining Wirral West and Chester and Hove. Of course Labour needs to do better amongst WVM than Miliband but it does not need to win them outright, as they now are more Tory and more UKIP than the nation as a whole!
Nonsense - the 3 wins you mention were really the only ones of any significance in a very poor night. Chester was almost a dead heat, Wirral west followed a huge and pretty tawdry assault on Eshter Mc Vey and was also very close as was Hove where the incumbent Tory MP stood down. As always you missed Smithson's point in your effort to worship at the shrine of Burnham. Labour should be writing off no-one in it's efforts to win back power and that includes the Sun and it's readers. Its ' we're too good to mix with that sort' message is not a good luck when you have under 240 MPs. If Burnham fails to get that he is indeed a complete and utter fool. It all gives echoes of Sadiq Khan's post election message to activists in Battersea when he called the voters 'bastards' for voting Tory.
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
The Times did back Blair in 2001 and 2005, but its readers still backed the Tories
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
The Times did back Blair once in 2001, but its readers still backed the Tories
I know this, my point was until probably 2009-ish, the Times would give Labour a good fair hearing. 2010-2015, they have become more and more Tory in their stance. I don't buy it now, because it has become too Tory for my liking.
Burnham continued Murdoch / Sun is spawn on the devil, wont get Times to be more sympathetic.
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
There are a certain breed of right-wing journalists who would like to think that a 10% deficit could have been eliminated by now with no real effort and no adverse economic effects. They are as delusional as the Pollys on the other side in never having to deal with political reality.
Anyone who pretends that the hard work of both the last government and the current government has failed to address at least some of these problems is frankly a superficial idiot.
I disagree! I think their idiocy is quite profound.
Not superficial in the least!
At least IDS has learned and moved on, which is more than can be said for Mr Montgomerie....
Shoot the messenger time twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
You are desperate if you are relying on Montgomerie. 5 years ago the inherited percentage was twice that. Tell us what were the employment levels 5 years ago?
There are a certain breed of right-wing journalists who would like to think that a 10% deficit could have been eliminated by now with no real effort and no adverse economic effects. They are as delusional as the Pollys on the other side in never having to deal with political reality.
Anyone who pretends that the hard work of both the last government and the current government has failed to address at least some of these problems is frankly a superficial idiot.
I disagree! I think their idiocy is quite profound.
Not superficial in the least!
At least IDS has learned and moved on, which is more than can be said for Mr Montgomerie....
LOL. You are right of course. Profound idiots offering absurdly superficial solutions.
It is as bad as being back in the Labour leadership campaign.
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
The Times did back Blair once in 2001, but its readers still backed the Tories
I know this, my point was until probably 2009-ish, the Times would give Labour a good fair hearing. 2010-2015, they have become more and more Tory in their stance. I don't buy it now, because it has become too Tory for my liking.
Burnham continued Murdoch / Sun is spawn on the devil, wont get Times to be more sympathetic.
Indeed, but my point is Labour does not need to win the scale of majorities Blair won to win an election, it just needs any majority at all. So it could still win an election with the Times and even the Sun opposing it!
Some commentators on the Times are also not exactly Cameroon (eg Aaronavitch last week attacked Osborne's IHT cut) and of course Tim Montgomerie now writes for the Times too
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
You are fond of quoting thickos today. What a dope you are. Ultra Socialist patriots eh - ethnic hating ultra socialist patriots. Sieg heil to you too.
I feel sorry for you
Look on the bright side, at least its not a cut/pasted link he didn't bother to read, things are looking up
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
The Times did back Blair once in 2001, but its readers still backed the Tories
I know this, my point was until probably 2009-ish, the Times would give Labour a good fair hearing. 2010-2015, they have become more and more Tory in their stance. I don't buy it now, because it has become too Tory for my liking.
Burnham continued Murdoch / Sun is spawn on the devil, wont get Times to be more sympathetic.
Indeed, but my point is Labour does not need to win the scale of majorities Blair won to win an election, it just needs any majority at all. So it could still win an election with the Times and even the Sun opposing it!
Perhaps, but why alienate them before you even start. Also, they have the ability to throw resources to drive narrative.
If you remember Cameron buttered up the Guardian when he became Tory leader, and even now they aren't that rude about him personally (Tories yes). He aint stupid he knows that BBC use Guardian to drive narrative. It is only really the Mirror that attacks him and absolutely nobody takes any notice of that comic, I think even most of their readers only get it for the sport.
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
You know that his wife was the inspiration for Jarvis Cocker's Common People?
"She came from Greece, she had a thirst for knowledge; she studied sculpture at St. Martin's College"
I didn't know that. Great song, seems to sum up a lot of politicians
According to the Grauniad Jarvis Cocker has kept quiet on the inspiration for 'Common People' - but I see Mr Time has not been overly kind to Mr Cocker in the intervening years:
Edit: Oh, and its not about out of touch upper middle class Guardian Writers students - but about the poor dispossessed - how silly of us to think otherwise.....
"Nonsense - the 3 wins you mention were really the only ones of any significance in a very poor night. Chester was almost a dead heat, Wirral west followed a huge and pretty tawdry assault on Eshter Mc Vey and was also very close as was Hove where the incumbent Tory MP stood down. As always you missed Smithson's point in your effort to worship at the shrine of Burnham. Labour should be writing off no-one in it's efforts to win back power and that includes the Sun and it's readers. Its ' we're too good to mix with that sort' message is not a good luck when you have under 240 MPs. If Burnham fails to get that he is indeed a complete and utter fool. It all gives echoes of Sadiq Khan's post election message to activists in Battersea when he called the voters 'bastards' for voting Tory."
No, the point remains all those seats were won by John Major in 1992 and Miliband won them, and Wolverhampton SW and Enfield North were also Tory in 1992, Labour in 2015. However, Miliband lost some seats like Gower, Nuneaton, Thurrock and Southampton Itchen which Kinnock won in 1992. So the middle class is relatively more Labour than 1992, the working class relatively less so
I happen to think Burnham will do better amongst white working class Sun readers than Ed Miliband. However, my point there is Labour does not need to win a majority of Sun readers to win a majority amongst the nation as a whole, it won 24% amongst Sun readers compared to 37% across the UK, so on UNS if it won 37% across the UK it would win only 31% amongst Sun readers
'Farewell to fiery Yanis, a reminder of how politics ought to be
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
You know that his wife was the inspiration for Jarvis Cocker's Common People?
"She came from Greece, she had a thirst for knowledge; she studied sculpture at St. Martin's College"
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 32m32 minutes ago On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
But as I pointed out below Sun readers do not represent floating voters anyway near as much as in 1997. In 1997 Sun readers voted 30% Tory, the same as the nation as a whole. In 2015 they voted 47% Tory, more than 10% more than the nation as a whole, and 24% Labour, 6% less than the nation as a whole
Yes, because Labour under Ed managed to successfully alienate swathes of working class Sun-reading white van men, in favour of Guardian-reading Islington intellectuals like himself. Who is going to get WVM back on side from Conservative and UKIP?
WVM is now more rightleaning relatively, Labour does better amongst some elements of the surburban middle class relatively eg gaining Wirral West and Chester and Hove. Of course Labour needs to do better amongst WVM than Miliband but it does not need to win them outright, as they now are more Tory and more UKIP than the nation as a whole!
Nonsense - the 3 wins you mention were really the only ones of any significance in a very poor night. Chester was almost a dead heat, Wirral west followed a huge and pretty tawdry assault on Eshter Mc Vey and was also very close as was Hove where the incumbent Tory MP stood down. As always you missed Smithson's point in your effort to worship at the shrine of Burnham. Labour should be writing off no-one in it's efforts to win back power and that includes the Sun and it's readers. Its ' we're too good to mix with that sort' message is not a good luck when you have under 240 MPs. If Burnham fails to get that he is indeed a complete and utter fool. It all gives echoes of Sadiq Khan's post election message to activists in Battersea when he called the voters 'bastards' for voting Tory.
Sadiq Khan did not call the voters bastards. Rather, he referenced a well-known joke by an American politician, Dick Tuck: "the people have spoken: the bastards!" Of course, after CCHQ's success with Liam Byrne's ill-judged homage to Reggie Maudling, Khan should have known better.
Burnham is an idiot to say he will cut out the Currant Bun or any media outlet that attacks the Labour Party. If he sticks to that, he will spend a lot of time talking to the Mirror and the BBC and that is about it.
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
The Times did back Blair once in 2001, but its readers still backed the Tories
I know this, my point was until probably 2009-ish, the Times would give Labour a good fair hearing. 2010-2015, they have become more and more Tory in their stance. I don't buy it now, because it has become too Tory for my liking.
Burnham continued Murdoch / Sun is spawn on the devil, wont get Times to be more sympathetic.
Indeed, but my point is Labour does not need to win the scale of majorities Blair won to win an election, it just needs any majority at all. So it could still win an election with the Times and even the Sun opposing it!
Some commentators on the Times are also not exactly Cameroon (eg Aaronavitch last week attacked Osborne's IHT cut) and of course Tim Montgomerie now writes for the Times too
Thats a great idea. We could call it the 35% strategy, and pretend that we arent really following it.
"Nonsense - the 3 wins you mention were really the only ones of any significance in a very poor night. Chester was almost a dead heat, Wirral west followed a huge and pretty tawdry assault on Eshter Mc Vey and was also very close as was Hove where the incumbent Tory MP stood down. As always you missed Smithson's point in your effort to worship at the shrine of Burnham. Labour should be writing off no-one in it's efforts to win back power and that includes the Sun and it's readers. Its ' we're too good to mix with that sort' message is not a good luck when you have under 240 MPs. If Burnham fails to get that he is indeed a complete and utter fool. It all gives echoes of Sadiq Khan's post election message to activists in Battersea when he called the voters 'bastards' for voting Tory."
No, the point remains all those seats were won by John Major in 1992 and Miliband won them, and Wolverhampton SW and Enfield North were also Tory in 1992, Labour in 2015. However, Miliband lost some seats like Gower, Nuneaton, Thurrock and Southampton Itchen which Kinnock won in 1992. So the middle class is relatively more Labour than 1992, the working class relatively less so
I happen to think Burnham will do better amongst white working class Sun readers than Ed Miliband. However, my point there is Labour does not need to win a majority of Sun readers to win a majority amongst the nation as a whole, it won 24% amongst Sun readers compared to 37% across the UK, so on UNS if it won 37% across the UK it would win only 31% amongst Sun readers
Comments
Revolting.
On #Marr, Tristram Hunt criticises @Andy4Leader refusal to talk to @TheSun, saying Labour needs all the friends it can get, inc Sun readers
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 21m21 minutes ago
Swift backlash against @TristramHuntMP's Burnham/Sun remarks. Shadow minister tells me: "Tristram Hunt is a public school academic.." [1/3]
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 19m19 minutes ago
Shad minister: "Idea he's some oracle of wisdom when it comes to Lab reconnecting w/ working class people who may read the Sun is laughable"
So team Burnham remain welded to cheap gestures which show limits of reaching out to convert floating voters and resort to vapid smears.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-33497318
Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to renationalise the railways?
Would you personally be willing to pay more tax to protect public sector workers pensions?
Do you not think that many of those 2015 sun readers who identify as Tory and UKIP would not have identified themselves as Labour in 1997?
Clue, the nation is more Tory leaning and UKIP voting than it was in 1997.
I now only give to local charities that are accountable.
Should Farron really be 1.03?
PSA: Good grief Labour, pull your heads out of your collective fundaments and start crafting some decent policies that will win you the market town/shire vote. That's not impossible.
Burnham's comments regarding the Sun are risible; hardly the mark of a statesman in the making. The fact that he's well placed to win make me despair.
With respect to the article; Mandelson is yesterday's man. I can't see how he could carry the party with him. I think that either Corbyn (don't laugh!) or Kendall would be far better for Labour than either Burnham or Cooper.
Corbyn, assuming that Labour don't necessarily want to be elected in 2020, would test the idea of a left wing Labour party to either success or destruction. It's probably worth the loss of five years of potential ministerial salaries to let that play out.
Kendall is the only moderately centrist candidate that can't be legitimately tagged as a Blairite/Brownite. She could defuse two festering issues that haunt the party - Iraq and the 2001-2010 financial management.
Would you support longer waiting lists in return for excluding independent health providers from carrying out the work, free at the point of use?
"Andy Burnham on why he should never be LAB leader. This guy is fool."
Builds on The Party Comes First Freudian Slip. The core vote strategy didn't work for Ed M, and Burnham seems to have failed to work that out.
If he can;t appeal outside his comfort zone, then Labour are screwed.
.@YvetteCooperMP to @JPonpolitics 'Most ppl in party know we're not going to win by turning the clock back...to a narrow party of the left'
What other inside knowledge is there?
@tnewtondunn: Yvette Cooper suggests Miliband will be in her Shad Cab. Tells @JPonpolitics; “Ed has done huge amount for the party and is very talented”.
Cliched Sun demographic. Proportionally male, proportionally younger, and fairly over represented in C1 C2 and D social classes.
These are the people who fell over themselves to vote for Blair, usually hard working, from poor pay to good pay, though the good pay usually comes from some damn hard grafting. They have little time for people with bad backs or depression who sit on benefits drinking special brew all day, and who often live on the same street (or did do).
You dont think that it is an issue that this demographic has swung so strongly against Labour? Could you see why Peter Mandelson might want to metaphorically stamp on your head?
There’s something enjoyably piratical and breezy about the ousted Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, riding off on his motorbike with his lovely wife for a post-resignation beer.
These scenes, and Mr Varoufakis’s general irreverent and non-servile behaviour, remind me of what I once found attractive about politics.
It’s also worth noting that the Syriza government in Athens has pretty much done what it promised voters it would do, and has fought its corner with nerve and style, and with a fair bit of the patriotic feeling that has been missing from British politics for quite a while.
Perhaps it’s time for me to change sides again. It’s a joy to see Europe’s Leftists, from Guardian writers to Greek politicians, finally realising that the European Union is a German-dominated imperial bully.
Maybe conservative patriots should now infiltrate the Left, its media and its political parties. There’s more future there than there is in the dehumanised, passionless, corporate wastes of Cameronism.
It’s quite obvious that the Left-wing candidate for the Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn, is a principled and uncorrupted real human, quite unlike the bland cybermen and cyberwomen he is standing against, whoever they are. I hope he wins, not because I think he’s a loser but because it would be good to have someone in front-rank politics who knows what he fights for and loves what he knows, as Englishmen are supposed to do.
A combination of fiery Leftism and Ukip-type patriotism could be the very thing to sweep away the So-Called Conservative Party which represents nothing except the careers of its MPs and the interests of its donors.
In Greece, an alliance of Leftism and patriotism demolished the rich established parties in months. I’ve wasted years trying to do it the other way. Well, the last time I owned a motorbike, it ended badly, but I’m thinking of getting another one.'
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
Varoufakis did a hell of a lot to destroy trust in Greece as a euro partner, when the one topic that today unites Greeks most is that they should stay in the euro. This could make him one of the most incompetent politicians of the 21st century.
That is the problem with the individualistic-heroic model of politics. Getting things done has no role in it.
I agree with the lead piece - finding a good strategist is crucial. Ideally you want someone who isn't identified with any particular wing of the party, which makes Mandleson risky, though if the leader is seen as left-wing then it could well be a smart balancing move (just as Kendall as leader should appoint someone on the left).
The huge Islington North CLP has its nomination meeting on Wednesday - Corbyn will win as he's the local MP, but it'll be interesting as a guide to London Labour to see how the others do and what happens about the deputy race.
'It's being self righteous about not talking to them which is the issue, not that it absolutely will swing things one way or another.'
Or alternatively he's going to do so well and be so popular that he can just ignore the 30% of Sun readers that vote Labour and not even bother to try and convert their readers that vote for other parties.
Self righteous, arrogant or just an idiot ?
All voters
Boris 22%
Osborne 12%
May 9%
Javid 2%
Tory voters
Boris 33%
Osborne 23%
May 11%
Javid 1%
https://yougov.co.uk/news/categories/politics/
https://twitter.com/montie/status/620139016873242624
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB?lang=en-gb
As you said, it was 11.4% in 2010.
Lets not forget as well that a free newspaper is desperate for the advertisisng - ie a successful economy - that gives it its profit.
"She came from Greece, she had a thirst for knowledge; she studied sculpture at St. Martin's College"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuTMWgOduFM
Advertising follows circulation
Yes the likes of the Sun's influence is on the decline, but they are part of a massive media organisation, and it just rubs them all up the wrong way.
Labour used to get a good hearing from the likes of the Times.
Removing that excess spending at once would have caused economic collapse and mass unemployment similar to what has happened to Greece. In an ideal world external demand could have replaced the borrowed spending but the EZ has struggled to even maintain its level of demand for UK goods and services and much of the rest of the world has not been much better.
Furthermore, the last government had left a series of booby traps which made deficit reduction even more difficult. The WTC system meant that falling unemployment actually meant an increase in benefit spending rather than the reverse. The expenditure on off balance sheet debt for much of the new buildings and schools was destined to rocket. The frightening cost of public sector final salary schemes was completely unaddressed. The publicly funded growth of third sector "charities" meant there was an enormously loud and supposedly impartial opposition to every cut, however modest.
Anyone who pretends that the hard work of both the last government and the current government has failed to address at least some of these problems is frankly a superficial idiot. Anyone who thinks that the deficit has not been further reduced simply because of some moral weakness or lack of will is so ignorant of the challenge as to be not worth listening to or reading. Regrettably Halligan and Montgomerie ever more frequently fall into these categories.
You never start a government from where you want to be, you are where you are.
Burnham continued Murdoch / Sun is spawn on the devil, wont get Times to be more sympathetic.
Not superficial in the least!
At least IDS has learned and moved on, which is more than can be said for Mr Montgomerie....
It is as bad as being back in the Labour leadership campaign.
Some commentators on the Times are also not exactly Cameroon (eg Aaronavitch last week attacked Osborne's IHT cut) and of course Tim Montgomerie now writes for the Times too
If you remember Cameron buttered up the Guardian when he became Tory leader, and even now they aren't that rude about him personally (Tories yes). He aint stupid he knows that BBC use Guardian to drive narrative. It is only really the Mirror that attacks him and absolutely nobody takes any notice of that comic, I think even most of their readers only get it for the sport.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/10/common-people-pulp-cocker-greek-girl
Edit: Oh, and its not about out of touch upper middle class Guardian Writers students - but about the poor dispossessed - how silly of us to think otherwise.....
"Nonsense - the 3 wins you mention were really the only ones of any significance in a very poor night. Chester was almost a dead heat, Wirral west followed a huge and pretty tawdry assault on Eshter Mc Vey and was also very close as was Hove where the incumbent Tory MP stood down. As always you missed Smithson's point in your effort to worship at the shrine of Burnham. Labour should be writing off no-one in it's efforts to win back power and that includes the Sun and it's readers. Its ' we're too good to mix with that sort' message is not a good luck when you have under 240 MPs. If Burnham fails to get that he is indeed a complete and utter fool. It all gives echoes of Sadiq Khan's post election message to activists in Battersea when he called the voters 'bastards' for voting Tory."
No, the point remains all those seats were won by John Major in 1992 and Miliband won them, and Wolverhampton SW and Enfield North were also Tory in 1992, Labour in 2015. However, Miliband lost some seats like Gower, Nuneaton, Thurrock and Southampton Itchen which Kinnock won in 1992. So the middle class is relatively more Labour than 1992, the working class relatively less so
I happen to think Burnham will do better amongst white working class Sun readers than Ed Miliband. However, my point there is Labour does not need to win a majority of Sun readers to win a majority amongst the nation as a whole, it won 24% amongst Sun readers compared to 37% across the UK, so on UNS if it won 37% across the UK it would win only 31% amongst Sun readers
I happen to think Burnham will do better amongst white working class Sun readers than Ed Miliband. However, my point there is Labour does not need to win a majority of Sun readers to win a majority amongst the nation as a whole, it won 24% amongst Sun readers compared to 37% across the UK, so on UNS if it won 37% across the UK it would win only 31% amongst Sun readers
Or it won 30% across the UK more to the point